405 


THE 


MARINE  CORPS  IN  MEXICO; 


SETTING  FORTH   ITS  CONDUCT  AS 


ESTABLISHED  BY  TESTIMONY 


A  GENERAL  COURT  MARTIAL, 


CONVENED   AT 


BROOKLYN,  N.  Y.,  SEPTEMBER,  1852, 


FOB  THE   TRIAL   OF 


FIRST  LIEUT.  JOHN  S.  DEVLIN, 


OF  THE  U.  S.  MARINE  CORPS. 


WASHINGTON : 

PRINTED    BY    LEMUEL    TOWERS. 

1852. 


Bwcroh  libray 

RECORD. 


NAVY  DEPARTMENT,  August  10,  1852. 

By  virtue  of  the  authority  contained  in  the  act  of  Congress, 
approved  the  23d  of  April,  A.  D.,  1800,  for  the  better  government 
of  the  Navy  of  the  United  States,  a  Marine  General  Court  Mar 
tial  is  hereby  ordered  to  convene  at  the  Marine  Barracks,  Brook 
lyn,  on  Tuesday  the  24th  day  of  August,  A.  D.,  1852,  or  as  soon 
thereafter  as  practicable,  for  the  trial  of  2d  Lieutenant  J.  H. 
Strickland,  and  for  such  other  persons  as  may  be  legally  brought 
before  it. 

The  Court  is  to  be  composed  of  the  following  named  officers — 
any  five  of  whom  are  empowered  to  act,  viz  : 

Capt.  ABRAHAM  N.  BREVOORT,  U.  S.  Marine  Corps. 

HENRY  B.  TYLER,  " 

"       and  Bvt.  Maj.  GEO.  H.  TERRETT, 
"  "  ARCH.  H.  GILLISPIE, 

1st  Lieut.  BEN.  E.  BROOKE, 

and  Bvt.  Capt.  WM.  A.T.  MADDOX,    ' 

ROBERT  TANSILL, 
1st  Lieut.  JOHN  C.  GRAYSON, 

2d  Lieut.  ISRAEL  GREEN.  Members. 

Supernumerary — AUG.  S.  NICHOLSON. 
HENRY  WINTER  DAVIS,  Esq.,  Judge  Advocate. 

JOHN  P.  KENNEDY, 

Secretary  of  the  Navy. 

Capt.  A.  N.  BREVOORT, 

U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  Portsmouth,  N.  H. 


NAVY  DEPARTMENT,  August  12,  1852. 

SIR:  Brevet  Captain  Tansill  has  been  relieved  from  duty  as  a 
member  of  the  General  Court  Martial  ordered  to  convene  at 
Brooklyn  on  the  24th  inst.,  and  Captain  J.  L.  C.  Hardy  has  been 
appointed  a  member  in  his  stead. 

I  am,  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  P.  KENNEDY. 
Capt.  A.  N.  BREVOORT, 

U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  Portsmouth,  N.  H. 


NAVY  DEPARTMENT,  August  13,  1852. 

SIR  :  Second  Lieutenant  Israel  Green  has  been  relieved  from 
duty  as  a  member  of  the  General  Court  Martial  ordered  to  con- 


vene  at  Brooklyn  on  the  24th  inst.,  and  1st  Lieutenant  Jabez  C, 
Rich  has  been  appointed  a  member  in  his  stead. 

I  am,  respectfully,  vour  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  P.  KENNEDY. 
Capt.  A.  N.  BREVOORT, 

U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  Portsmouth,  N.  H. 


NAVY  YARD,  August  26,  1852. 

SIR  :  The  Marine  General  Court  Martial  of  which  you  are  the 
presiding  officer,  is,  in  compliance  with  its  request,  communica 
ted  through  the  Judge  Advocate,  hereby  authorized  to  hold  its 
future  sittings  at  the  Navy  Yard,  New  York. 

I  am,  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  P.  KENNEDY. 
Capt.  A.  N.  BREVOORT, 

U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  New  York. 


NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN,  August  31, '1852. 

And  the  Court  having  thus  closed  the  trial  of  the  said  Lieut. 
J.  H.  Strickland,  and  the  Judge  Advocate  having  produced  to  the 
Court  charges  and  specifications  preferred  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy  against  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  of  the  U.  S.  Marine 
Corps,  who  is  under  arrest  by  order  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 
and  ordered  for  trial,  and  has  reported  himself  to  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate  to  await  the  orders  of  the  Court  in  that  behalf. 

The  Court  now  proceeds  to  organize  itself  for  that  purpose. 

The  Court  convened  in  pursuance  of  the  hereinbefore  recited 
precept  and  orders  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy.  Present,  the 
following  members,  comprising  the  Court,  that  is  to  say : 

Capts.  A.  N.  Brevoort,  U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  Henry  B.  Tyler,  J. 
L.  C.  Hardy;  Capt.  and  Bvt.  Majors  George  H.  Terrett,  Arch.  H. 
Gillispie;  1st  Lieuts.  Ben.  E.  Brooke,  Jabez  C.  Rich;  1st  Lieut, 
and  Bvt.  Capt.  Wm.  A.  T.  Maddox;  1st  Lieut.  J.  C.  Grayson,  and 
Bvt.  1st  Lieut.  Aug.  S.Nicholson;  Supernumerary,  and  Henry 
Winter  Davis,  Judge  Advocate,  and  1st  Lieut.  John  S.  Devlin, 
the  accused. 

And  thereupon  the  Judge  Advocate  proceeded  to  read  the  pre 
cept  by  virtue  whereof  the  Court  is  convened,  as  recorded  at 
page  1.  And  the  Judge  Advocate  also  read  the  letters  from  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy,  dated  12th,  13th,  and  26th  August,  1852, 
as  given  at  the  beginning  of  this  record,  assigning  Captain  J.  L. 
C.  Hardy  and  1st  Lieutenant  Jabez  C.  Rich,  for  duty  as  members 
of  this  Court,  instead  of  Brevet  Captain  Tansill  and  2d  Lieuten 
ant  Israel  Green,  relieved,  and  authorizing  the  Court  to  hold  its 
future  sittings  at  the  Navy  Yard,  New  York. 

And  thereupon  the  accused,  John  S.  Devlin,  Lieutenant  of  the 
Marine  Corps,  being  called,  appears  in  open  Court,  and  the  Judge 


Advocate,  demands  of  the  accused,  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin, 
whether  he  has  any  exception  or  cause  of  challenge  to  make  or 
allege  against  the  said  Court,  or  any  member  or  members  thereof, 
who  are  now  about  to  be  sworn  for  trial  of  certain  charges  and 
specifications  of  charges  preferred  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy 
against  him,  the  said  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin. 

Whereupon  the  said  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  makes  the  fol 
lowing  application  to  the  Court,  in  writing,  which  is  in  the  fol 
lowing  words,  viz : 

*'  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA  against  JOHN  S.  DEVLIN,  upon  charges 
and  specifications  preferred  against  him  by  the  Hon.  the  Secre 
tary  of  the  Navy  of  the  United  States  : 

*'  To  the  honorable  the  Court  Martial  assembled 

at  the  U.  S.  Navy  Yard,  Brooklyn: 

"  The  undersigned  respectfully  petitions  the  Court  as  follows  : 
That  he  desires  to  appear  by  counsel  to  aid  and  assist  him  in  his 
defence,  and  to  cross-examine  the  witnesses  introduced  on  the 
part  of  the  Government,  and  hereby  nominate  as  such  my  coun 
sel,  Nat.  P.  Warring,  Esq.,  counsellor-at-law  of  the  city  of  Brook 
lyn  ;  and  prays  the  Court  to  enter  an  order  or  direction  to  that 
eftect,  JOHN  S.  DEVLIN." 


BROOKLYN,  August  31,  1852. 

The  original  whereof  is  annexed,  marked  No.  1.  And  there 
upon  the  Court  orders  that  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  have  the  aid 
of  the  counsel  selected  by  him,  subject  to  the  usual  restrictions  in 
Courts  Martial. 

And  thereupon  the  said  J.  S.  Devlin  makes  the  objections  to 
the  Court  in  writing — -following  which  are  in  the  following 
words,  viz : 

The  original  being  marked  No.  2* 

The  accused  before  the  Court  have  been  sworn,  having  been 
called  on  by  the  Judge  Advocate  to  say  if  he  challenges  any 
member  of  the  Court,  makes  the  following  objections  to  the  Court : 

"First.  That  the  following  persons  are  incompetent  to  act  as 
members  of  the  Court:  R.  Tansill,  John  Grayson,  Israel  Green, 
and  Aug.  S.  Nicholson,  each  and  every  one  of  them  being  inferior 
in  rank  to  the  accused,  and  incompetent  to  act  as  judges. 

"Second.  That  the  order  convening  the  Court  is  for  the  trial 
of  Lieutenant  J.  H.  Strickland,  and  such  other  persons  as  may  be 
legally  brought  before  them.  The  accused  cannot  be  tried  by 
the  Court  now  assembled,  until  it  first  appear  that  he  has  been 
legally  brought  before  the  Court. 

"If  not  legally  brought  before  the  Court,  there  is  no  jurisdic 
tion  to  try,  and  this  must  affirmatively  appear  before  the  Court 
can  proceed,  JOHN  S.  DEVLIN." 


And  thereupon  the  Court  is  cleared  for  deliberation  upon  the 
objections  so  propounded.  And  the  Court  being  opened,  the  opin 
ion  is  announced  as  follows:  That  1st  Lieutenant  and  Brevet 
Captain  Tansill  and  2d  Lieutenant  Green,  having  been  relieved 
from  sitting  on  the  Court,  the  objection  is  frivolous,  and  though 
1st  Lieutenant  Grayson  and  brevet  1st  Lieutenant  Nicholson,  be 
inferior  in  rank  to  the  accused,  yet  the  35th  .article  for  the  gov 
ernment  of  the  Navy,  authorizes  0113  half  of  the  members  of  a 
General  Court  Martial  to  be  inferior  to  the  accused,  and  the  ob 
jections  aforesaid  to  those  members  is  therefore  disallowed. 

And  as  to  the  second  objection  touching  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Court  to  try  the  said  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  it  appears  to 
this  Court  that  the  said  J.  S.  Devlin  has  been  formally  arrested 
by  order  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  he  having  formally  re 
ported  himself  to  the  Judge  Advocate  as  awaiting  his  trial,  and 
has  this  day  appeared  in  open  Court,  and  the  Court  has  received 
charges  and  specifications  of  charges,  prepared  by  the  Secretary 
of  the  Navy,  whereon  the  Court  is  ordered  to  try  the  said  Lieu 
tenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  as  appears  from  such  order  hereto  annexed, 
marked  No.  10,  and  such  charges  and  specifications  are  their  suf 
ficient  authority  to  proceed  with  the  trial  of  the  accused,  it  is 
therefore  ordered  that  the  said  objection  be  not  allowed.  And 
thereupon  the  accused  challenges  Brevet  Major  Geo.  H.  Terrett, 
as  a  member  of  this  Court,  and  assigns  as  principal  cause  of 
challenge,  that  he  is  a  material  witness  necessary  for  the  accused 
on  the  trial  of  the  charges  and  specifications  against  him. 

And  the  Court  being  cleared  for  deliberation,  and  having  de 
liberated,  and  being  opened,  and  the  accused  and  his  council  being 
present,  the  opinion  is  announced  as  follows :  That  the  fact  that 
the  accused  may  desire  to  examine  a  member  of  the  Court  as  a 
witness,  though  material  and  necessary,  is  no  ground  of  challenge, 
and  the  objection  is  therefore  disallowed.  And  thereupon  the  ac 
cused  further  says  that  he  challenges  the  authority  of  the  Court 
to  proceed  further  with  this  cause,  because  while  the  Court  was 
closed  for  deliberation,  and  in  the  absence  of  the  accused,  the 
Judge  Advocate  called  into  the  court  room  two  persons,  Lieuten 
ant  Colonel  Wm.  Dulany  and  1st  Lieutenant  Isaac  T.  Doughty, 
for  the  purpose  of  making  inquiry  of  them. 

But  the  Courtis  of  opinion  that  the  objection  is  unfounded  and 
disallows  the  same.  The  said  Court  being  of  opinion  that  the 
Judge  Advocate  may  consult  with  his  own  witnesses  or  any  other 
person,  without  the  presence  of  the  accused,  without  at  all  im 
pairing  the  organization  of  this  Court,  and  the  said  persons  not 
having  been  called  on  to  give  any  testimony  before  the  Court,  but 
having  been  called  by  the  Judge  Advocate  alone  for  private  con 
versation. 

And  thereupon  the  accused  declares  that  he  challenges  1st 
Lieutenant  Jabez  C.  Rich  as  a  member  of  this  Court,  on  the 
same  ground  on  which  he  abovre  challenged  Captain  Terrett,  and 
also  on  other  grounds,  which  he  desires  time  to  prepare  and  state. 


And  prior  to  the  offering  of  this  challenge,  the  said  1st  Lieu 
tenant  Jabez  C.  Rich  having  stated  to  the  Court  that  he  had 
formerly  been  so  connected  with  some  of  the  matters  about  to  be 
investigated,  under  the  charges  and  specifications  in  this* case, 
that  he  was  unwilling  to  act  and  sit  as  a  member  of  the  Court, 
and  prayed  that  he  might  be  permitted  to  withdraw  from  the 
said  Court  during  this  cause. 

The  Court  is  cleared  for  consideration  of  the  matters  aforesaid, 
the  accused  having  in  open  Court  stated  that  he  consents  to  the 
withdrawal  of  Lieutenant  Rich  if  the  Court  see  fit  to  allow  it 
on  his  application,  and  the  Court  having  heard  the  further  de 
clarations  of  the  said  Lieutenant  J.  C.  Rich,  that  from  his  pre 
vious  connexion  with  the  transactions,  he  feared  to  trust  himself 
in  the  trial  of  the  charges,  and  having  deliberated  on  the  matter, 
and  the  Court  being  opened,  and  the  accused  and  his  counsel 
being  present,  the  opinion  of  the  Court  is  announced  as  follows: 
That  not  making  any  decision  on  the  challenge  of  the  accused, 
the  Court  allows  the  withdrawal  of  the  said  Lieutenant  Jabez 
C.  Rich  on  his  application. 

And  thereupon  Brevet  Lieutenant  Aug.  S.  Nicholson  sits  as  a 
member  of  this  Court. 

And  thereupon  the  accused  challenges  Lieutenant  Aug.  S. 
Nicholson  on  the  ground  that  his  feelings  are  hostile  to  the  ac 
cused,  they  having  been  on  unfriendly  terms  for  three  years,  and 
said  Lieutenant  Nicholson  having  formed  and  expressed  aii 
opinion  on  some  of  the  charges  and  specifications  to  be  tried, 
and  this  exception  accused  offers  to  support  by  witnesses. 

Thereupon  the  said  Lieutenant  Aug.  S.  Nicholson  rose  and 
stated  to  the  Court,  that  h%  has  not  at  any  time  expressed  any 
opinion  on  any  of  the  charges  or  specifications  to  be  tried  in  this 
cause ;  and  he  further  states  that  while  it  is  true,  that  he  and 
the  accused  have  not  spoken  for  two  or  three  years,  yet  that  no 
quarrel  has  taken  place  between  them,  and  that  he  entertains  no 
hostile  or  unfriendly  feelings  against  the  accused,  but  feels  able 
fully  and  impartially  to  try  the  charges  preferred  against  him, 
and  thereupon  the  accused  declares  himself  satisfied,  and  with 
draws  the  challenge  aforesaid. 

And  thereupon,  there  being  no  further  objection,  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate  proceeds  to  administer  to  the  President  of  the  Court,  and 
to  each  member  of  the  Court,  the  oath  prescribed  by  the  36th 
article  of  the  rules  and  regulations  for  the  government  of  the 
Navy  of  the  United  States,  as  set  forth  in  the  act  of  Congress  of 
23d  April,  1800.  Which  oath  is  duly  taken  by  all  and  each  of 
the  said  Court,  as  therein  directed  to  be  administered  to  them. 

And  thereupon  the  President  of  the  Court  administered  to  the 
Judge  advocate  the  oath  prescribed  by  the  36th  article  of  the 
rules  and  regulations  aforesaid  for  the  Judge  Advocate.  Which 
oath  the  Judge  Advocate  formally  and  duly  took  as  prescribed 
by  the  said  act  of  Congress,  23d  April,  1800. 

And  thereupon  the  Court  being  duly  organized,  adjourned  until 
to-morrow  morning,  10  o'clock. 


6 

NANY  YARD,  BROOKLYN,  NEW  YORK, 

September,  I  1852,  11  o'clock. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment.  Present :  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court  as  sworn  on  the 
31st  August,  1852,  the  Judge  advocate,  the  accused  Lieutenant 
John  S.  Devlin  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  the  Court  of  yesterday  are  read  and  ap 
proved. 

And  thereupon  the  Judge  Advocate  calls  on  the  said  1st  Lieu 
tenant  John  8.  Devlin,  the  accused,  to  listen  to  the  reading  of 
the  charges  and  specifications  of  charges  preferred  against  him 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  and  the  same  are  read  by  the 
Judge  Advocate  in  his  presence  as  follows,  viz  : 

No.  17. 

Charges,  and  specifications  of  charges,  prepared  by  the  Secretary 
of  the  Navy,  against  First  Lieutenant  John  S.  Devlin,  of  the 
United  States  Marine  Corps. 

CHARGE  I. 
Treating  with  contempt  his  superior  officers. 

Specification. 

In  this,  that  the  said  John  S.  Devlin,  First  Lieutenant  in  the 
United  States  Marine  Corps,  did  write  and  prepare  for  publica 
tion,  and  did  publish  or  cause  to  be  published,  in  a  newspaper 
called  "  The  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagte,"  published  in  the  City  of 
Brooklyn,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  on  or  about  the  twelfth  day 
of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  a  certain  written  com 
munication,  in  a  certain  part  of  which  wTitten  article  or  com 
munication  were  contained  certain  disrespectful  and  contemptu 
ous  matters  of  the  tenor  and  effect  following — that  is  to  say : 

"Marine  Soldiers." 

"Mr.  EDITOR:  A  detachment  of  fine  looking  marine  soldiers 
left  this  city  to-day  for  Norfolk,  by  the  Steamer  Roanoke,  intended 
for  the  guard  of  the  Sloop  St.  Louis,  about  to  join  the  Mediter 
ranean  Squadron.  The  detachment  was  under  the  command  of 
that  old  and  faithful  officer,  Lieutenant  Devlin — I  wish  I  could 
say  Major,  as  he  has  earned  that  title  by  bravery  in  much  greater 
degree  than^any  officerswho  received  it.  But  it  is  well  known 
that  flattery  and  the  favor  of  the  *  stay-at-home  drones  of  head 
quarters/  are  much  more  available  than  bravery  in  procuring 
promotion  in  the  marine  corps." 

Which  said  part  of  said  publication  does  reflect  injuriously 
upon,  and  is  contemptuous  and  disrespectful  towards,  the  President 
of  the  United  States,  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  at  the  date  of 


the  publication  thereof,  and  Colonel  and  Brevet  Brigadier  Gen 
eral  Archibald  Henderson,  Commandant  of  the  United  States 
Marine  Corps,  and  tends  directly  to  destroy  the  respect  of  the 
officers  of  the  United  States  Marine  Corps  for  those  officer's,  and 
to  bring  them  into  hatred  and  contempt,  to  the  great  injury  of 
the  discipline  of  the  said  corps. 

CHARGE  II. 

The  using  of  provoking  and  reproachful  words  respecting  other 
persons  of  the  marine  corps  of  the  United  States. 

Specification  1. 

In  this,  that  the  said  First  Lieutenant  John  S.  Devlin,  of  the 
United  States  Marine  Corps,  did  write  or  prepare  for  publication, 
and  publish  or  procure  to  be  published,  in  a  certain  newspaper 
called  "The  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle,"  published  in  the  City  of 
Brooklyn,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  on  or  about  the  twelfth  day 
of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  a  certain  written  com 
munication,  in  a  certain  part  whereof,  were  contained  certain 
provoking  and  reproachful  words  respecting  other  persons  of  the 
marine  corps  of  the  United  States,  to  the  tenor  and  effect  follow 
ing — that  is  to  say  : 

"Marine  Soldiers" 

"Mr.  EDITOR:  A  detachment  of  fine  looking  marine  soldiers 
left  this  city  to-day  for  Norfolk,  by  the  Steamer  Roanoke,  intended 
for  the  guard  of  the  Sloop  St.  Louis,  about  to  join  the  Mediter 
ranean  Squadron.  The  detachment  was  under  the  command  of 
that  old  and  faithful  officer,  Lieutenant  Devlin — I  wish  I  could 
say  Major,  as  he  has  earned  that  title  by  bravery,  in  much  greater 
degree  than  many  officers  who  received  it.  But  it  is  well  known 
that  flattery  and  the  favor  of  the  'stay-at-home  drones  of  head 
quarters,'  are  much  more  available  than  bravery  in  procuring 
promotion  in  the  Marine  Corps." 

Which  words  were  and  are  provoking  and  reproachful  towards 
the  officers  at  the  date  thereof  stationed  at  headquarters,  to  wit : 
Colonel  and  Brevel  Brigadier  General  Archibald  Henderson, 
Commandant  of  the  Marine  Corps ;  Major  Parke  G.  Howie,  Ad 
jutant  and  Inspector  of  the  United  States  Marine  Corps,  and 
Major  Augustus  A.  Nicholson,  Quartermaster  of  the  United 
States  Marine  Corps. 

Specification  2. 

In  this,  that  the  said  First  Lieutenant  John  S.  Devlin,  of  the 
United  States  Marine  Corps,  did  write  for  publication,  and  pub 
lish  or  cause  to  be  published,  in  a  newspaper  called  "  The  Brook 
lyn  Daily  Eagle,"  published  in  the  City  of  Brooklyn,  in  the  State 


8 

of  New  York,  on  or  about  the  twelfth  day  of  July,  eighteen  hun 
dred  and  fifty-two,  a  certain  written  communication  in  a  certain 
part  whereof,  were  contained  certain  provoking  and  reproachful 
words  of  the  tenor  and  effect  following — that  is  to  say : 

"The  writer  of  this  article  saw  the  bravery  of  Lieutenant 
Devlin  put  to  the  test  at  the  storming  of  Chapultepec,  and  well 
did  it  stand  the  trial.  While  other  officers  halted  under  fire 
of  the  enemy,  and  sat  fat  on  the  ground,  under  cover  of  an  em 
bankment  topped  with  Maguay  bushes,  he  waved  his  sword  that 
was  presented  to  him  by  his  friends  of  Brooklyn,  and  told  the 
marines  to  follow  him,  and  he  would  lead  them.  Many  of  them 
did  bravely  follow  his  example  and  were  wounded  or  killed  ;  he 
himself  received  a  shot  through  his  chin,  the  scar  of  which  he 
will  bear  to  the  grave,  To  his  credit,  be  it  said,  that  while  an 
other  marine  officer  who  had  command  of  a  storming  party,  sing 
ularly  escaped  without  a  scratch,  he,  Lieutenant  Devlin,  who  was 
quartermaster  on  that  occasion,  and  had  to  crave  permission  to 
leave  his  wagon  train  and  enter  the  fight  as  a  volunteer,  gained  the 
distinguished  credit  of  being  the  only  marine  officer  whose  blood 
flowed  for  his  country  in  the  valley  of  Mexico,  except  the  daunt 
less  Major  Twiggs,  who  was  killed  at  the  head  of  his  command." 

Which  said  words  refer  to  the  conduct  of  Captain  and  Brevet 
Major  John  G.  Reynolds,  of  the  United  States  Marine  Corps,  who 
commanded  the  storming  party  in  the  said  communication  men 
tioned,  at  the  castle  of  Chapultepec  in  Mexico,  in  September, 
eighteen  hundred  and  forty-seven,  and  refer  likewise  to  the  con 
duct  of  the  other  officers  and  marines  of  the  United  States  Ma 
rine  Corps  engaged  in  the  said  attack ;  and  contain  false  and 
slanderous  imputations  of  failure  or  backwardness  in  the  per 
formance  of  duty  on  that  occasion,  calculated  to  lead  to  breaches 
of  the  peace  on  the  part  of  the  said  officers  and  marines,  so  re 
proachfully  and  provokingly  spoken  of. 

CHARGE  III. 

Being  guilty  of  conduct  unbecoming  an  officer  and  a  gentle 
man. 

Specification. 

In  this,  that  the  said  First  Lieutenant  John  S.  Devlin,  of  the 
United  States  Marine  Corps,  did  write  and  prepare  for  publica 
tion,  and  did  publish  or  cause  to  be  published,  in  a  certain  news 
paper  called  "The  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle,"  published  in  the  City 
of  Brooklyn,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  on  or  about  the  twelfth 
day  of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  a  certain  written 
communication  of  the  tenor  and  effect  following — that  is  to  say  : 

"Marine  Soldiers." 

"Mr.  EDITOR  :  A  detachment  of  fine  looking  marine  soldiers  left 
this  city  to-day  for  Norfolk  by  the  Steamer  Roanoke,  intended  for 


9 

the  guard  of  the  Sloop  St.  Louis,  about  to  join  the  Mediterranean 
Squadron.  The  detachment  was  under  the  command  of  that 
old  and  faithful  officer,  Lieut.  Devlin — I  wish  I  could  say  Major, 
as  he  has  earned  that  title  by  bravery  in  a  much  greater  degree 
than  many  officers  who  received  it.  But  it  is  well  known  that 
flattery  and  the  favor  of  the  '  stay-at-home  drones  of  headquar 
ters,'  are  much  more  available  than  bravery  in  procuring  promo 
tion  in  the  marine  corps.  The  writer  of  this  article  saw  the 
bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  put  to  the  test  at  the  storming  of 
Chapultepec,  and  well  did  it  stand  the  trial.  While  other  officers 
halted  under  the  fire  of  the  enemy  and  s&tflat  on  the  ground,  un 
der  cover  of  an  embankment  topped  with  Maguay  bushes,  he 
waved  his  sword  that  was  presented  to  him  by  his  friends  of 
Brooklyn,  and  told  the  marines  to  follow,  and  he  would  lead 
them.  Many  of  them  did  bravely  follow  his  example,  and  were 
wounded  or  killed ;  he  himself  received  a  shot  through  his  chin, 
the  scar  of  which  he  will  bear  to  the  grave.  To  his  credit,  be  it 
said,  that  while  another  marine  officer  who  had  command  of  a 
storming  party  singularly  escaped  without  a  scratch,  he,  Lieuten 
ant  Devlin,  who  was  quartermaster  on  that  occasion,  and  had  to 
crave  permission  to  leave  his  wagon-train  to  enter  the  fight  as 
a  volunteer,  gained  the  distinguished  credit  of  being  the  only 
marine  officer  whose  blood  flowed  for  his  country  in  the  valley  of 
Mexico,  except  the  dauntless  Major  Twiggs,  who  was  killed  at 
the  head  of  his  command.  As  an  adopted  citizen,  I  feel  a  pride 
in  bearing  this  testimeny  to  the  bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  in 
Mexico,  and  although  not  personally  acquainted  with  that  officer, 
I  am  well  acquainted  with  the  facts,  and  stand  prepared  to  sub 
stantiate  them. 

"AN  OBSERVER." 

Which  said  communication  was,  on  or  about  the  tenth  day  of 
July,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  handed  by  the  said  First 
Lieutenant,  John  S.  Devlin,  or  by  his  directions,  to  James  Mc- 
Gann,  a  Sergeant  in  the  United  States  Marine  Corps  stationed 
at  the  Marine  Barracks,  Brooklyn,  with  the  request  of  the  said 
First  Lieutenant,  John  S.  Devlin,  that  he,  the  said  James  Mc- 
Gann,  would  copy  or  cause  to  be  copied  the  said  written  commu 
nication,  and  that  the  copy  so  made  should  be  published  in  the 
said  newspaper  called  "  The  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle  ;"  and  the  said 
James  McGann  did  so  copy  or  cause  to  be  copied,  and  did  so  con 
vey  or  cause  to  be  conveyed  to  the  office  of  the  said  newspaper, 
the  said  written  communication  ;  and  the  said  written  article  or 
communication  does  falsely  and  maliciously  misstate  and  misrep 
resent  the  operations  and  conduct  of  the  officers  and  soldiers  of 
the  marine  corps  engaged  in  the  storming  of  Chapultepec,  in  the 
said  article  mentioned  ;  and  does  falsely  and  maliciously  impute 
backwardness  and  dereliction  in  duty  to  the  said  Captain  and 
Brevet  Major,  John  G.  Reynolds,  the  marine  officer  who  had  com 
mand  of  the  storming  party  in  the  said  article  mentioned :  and 


10 

does  falsely  and  maliciously  impute  cowardice  and  dereliction  of 
duty  to  the  officers  commanding  the  marine  soldiers,  engaged  in 
storming  Chapultepec,  who,  it  states,  halted  under  fire  of  the 
enemy,  and  sat  flat  on  the  ground  under  cover  of  an  enbarkment 
topped  with  Maguay  bushes,  while  said  article  falsely  lauds  and 
magnifies  the  conduct  and  exploits  of  the  writer  thereof,  the  said 
First  Lieutenant,  John  S.  Devlin  ;  and  falsely  states  the  writer 
thereof  to  be  not  personally  acquainted  with  the  said  First  Lieu 
tenant,  John  S.  Devlin  ;  and  the  said  First  Lieutenant,  John  S. 
Devlin,  did  procure  the  said  James  McGann  to  copy  and  convey 
for  publication  said  article  reflecting  on  the  conduct  of  his  supe 
riors  in  rank,  all  which  acts  were  unbecoming  an  officer  and  a 
gentleman. 

CHARGE  IV. 

The  being  guilty  of  scandulous  conduct  tending  to  the  destruc 
tion  of  good  morals. 

Specification. 

In  this,  that  the  said  First  Lieutenant,  John  S.  Devlin,  of  the 
United  States  Marine  Corps,  did  write  and  prepare  for  publica 
tion,  and  did  publish  or  cause  to  be  published,  in  a  certain  news 
paper  called  "  The  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle,"  published  in  the  city 
of  Brooklyn,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  on  or  about  the  twelfth 
day  of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  a  certain  written 
communication  of  the  tenor  and  effect  following — that  is  to  say : 

"Marine  Soldiers" 

"Mr.  EDITOR:  A  detachment  of  fine  looking  marine  soldiers 
left  this  city  to-day  for  Norfolk  by  the  Steamer  Roanoke,  intended 
for  the  guard  of  the  Sloop  St.  Louis,  about  to  join  the  Mediter 
ranean  Squadron.  The  detachment  was  under  the  command  of 
that  old  and  faithful  officer,  Lieutenant  Devlin — I  wish  I  could 
say  Major,  as  he  has  earned  that  title  by  bravery  in  much  greater 
degree  than  many  officers  who  received  it.  But  it  is  well  known 
that  flattery  and  the  favor  of  the  '  stay  at-home  drones  of  head 
quarters/  are  much  more  available  than  bravery  in  procuring 
promotion  in  the  marine  corps.  The  writer  of  this  article  saw  the 
bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  put  to  the  test  at  the  storming  of 
Chapultepec,  and  well  did  it  stand  the  trial.  While  other  offi 
cers  halted  under  fire  of  the  enemy,  and  sat  flat  on  the  ground, 
under  cover  of  an  embankment  topped  with  Maguay  bushes,  he 
waved  his  sword  that  was  presented  to  him  by  his  friends  of 
Brooklyn,  and  told  the  marines  to  follow  him,  and  he  would  lead 
them.  Many  of  them  did  bravely  follow  his  example,  and  were 
wounded  or  killed,  he  himself  received  a  shot  through  his  chin, 
the  scar  of  which  he  will  bear  to  the  grave.  To  his  credit  be  it 
said,  that  while  another  marine  officer  who  had  command  of  a 
storming  party  singularly  escaped  without  a  scratch,  he,  Lieuten- 


11 

t^\ 

ant  Devlin,  who  was  quartermaster  on  that  occasion,  and  had  to      J 
crave  permission  to  leave  his  wagon  train  to  enter  the  fight  as  a 
volunteer,  gained  the  distinguished  credit  of  being  the  only  ma 
rine  officer  whose  blood  flowed  for  his  country  in  the  vaHey  of 
Mexico,  except  the  dauntless  Major  Twiggs,  who  was  killed  at 
the  head  of  his  command.     As  an  adopted  citizen,  I  feel  a  pride 
in  bearing  this  testimony  to  the  bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  in 
Mexico,  and  although  not  personally  acquainted  with  that  officer, 
I  am  well  acquainted  with  the  facts,  and  stand  prepared  to  sub-    j 
stantiate  them,  if-  required." 

"AN  OBSERVER." 

Which  said  communication  was,  on  or  about  the  tenth  day  of 
July,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  by  the  said  First  Lieuten 
ant,  John  S.  Devlin,  or  by  his  directions  to  James  McGann,  a 
Sergeant  in  the  United  States  Marine  Corps  stationed  at  the  Ma 
rine  Barracks,  Brooklyn,  with  the  request  of  the  said  First  Lieu 
tenant  John  S.  Devlin,  that  the  said  James  McGann  would  copy 
or  cause  to  be  copied  the  said  written  communication,  and  that 
the  copy  thereof  should  be  published  in  the  said  newspaper 
called  the  "  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle,"  and  the  said  James  McGann 
did  copy  or  cause  to  be  copied  said  article,  and  did  convey  or 
cause  to  be  conveyed  to  the  office  of  said  paper  for  publication, 
the  said  written  communication  ;  and  the  said  article  or  written 
communication  does  falsely  and  maliciously  misstate  and  misrep 
resent  the  operations  and  conduct  of  the  officers  and  soldiers  of 
the  marine  corps  engaged  in  the  storming  of  Chapultepec  in  said 
article  mentioned  :  and  does  falsely  and  maliciously  impute  back 
wardness  and  dereliction  in  duty  to  the  said  Captain  and  Brevet 
Major  John  G.  Reynolds,  the  marine  officer  who  had  command  of 
the  storming  party  of  ri;arines  in  said  article  mentioned;  and 
does  falsely  and  maliciously  impute  cowardice  and  dereliction  of 
duty  to  the  officers  commanding  the  marine  soldiers  engaged  in 
the  storming  of  Chapultepec,  who,  it  states,  halted  under  the  fire 
of  the  enemy,  and  sat  flat  on  the  ground  under  cover  of  an  em 
bankment  topped  with  Maguay  bushes,  while  said  article  lauds 
the  conduct  of  said  First  Lieutenant  Devlin,  the  writer  thereof, 
and  contrasts  his  conduct  injuriously  with  that  of  the  other  offi 
cers  of  said  marine  corps  then  and  there  engaged :  and  does 
falsely  state  the  writer  of  said  article  not  to  be  personally  ac 
quainted  with  the  said  First  Lieutenant  Devlin :  and  the  said 
First  Lieutenant,  John  S.  Devlin,  did  procure  the  publication  of 
that  false  and  malicious  article  reflecting  on  the  commissioned 
officers  of  the  marine  corps  superior  to  said  First  Lieutenant 
Devlin,  through  the  instrumentality  of  said  James  McGann — all 
which  acts  were  scandalous  conduct,  tending  to  the  destruction 
of  good  morals. 

JOHN  P.  KENNEDY, 

Secretary  of  the  Navy. 

NAVY  DEPARTMENT,  August  16,  1852. 


12 

The  original  of  which  charges  and  specifications  is  hereto 
annexed,  marked  No.  17,  which  being  read  and  heard,  the  Judge 
Advocate  demands  of  the  accused  whether  he  be  guilty  or  not 
guilty  of  the  said  charges  and  specifications — and  thereupon  the 
accused  tenders  an  objection  to  pleading  in  the  following  words, 
viz  :  The  Court  being  organized,  and  the  charges  and  specifica 
tions  having  been  read  in  the  presence  and  hearing  of  the  ac 
cused,  and  he  having  been  arraigned  and  required  to  plead  to 
the  said  charges  and  specifications,  previous  to  such  pleading, 
now  makes  the  following  objection  to  the  Court  preceding  any 
further  with  the  trial  of  the  accused.  The  order  convening  the 
Court,  dated  10th  August,  1852,  is  an  order  for  the  Court  to  as 
semble  for  the  trial  of  2d  Lieutenant  J.  H.  Strickland,  "  and  of 
such  other  persons  as  may  be  legally  brought  before  it." 

There  is  no  evidence,  nor  does  the  record  show,  that  the  accus 
ed  is  legally  brought  before  the  Court.  The  mere  attendance  of 
an  officer  before  a  Court,  is  not  evidence  "per  se"  that  he  is  legal 
ly  brought  before  the  Court. 

JOHN  S.  DEVLIN. 

And  the  Court  being  closed  for  deliberation,  and  having  delib 
erated,  and  being  opened,  the  opinion  is  announced  as  follows : 

That  the  objection  is  disallowed  and  the  accused  is  required 
to  plead  to  the  said  specifications  and  charges  as  read  to  him. 

And  thereupon  the  accused  in  open  Court  plead  not  guilty  to 
the  1st  specification  of  the  1st  charge,  and  not  guilty  to  the  1st 
charge. 

Not  guilty  to  the  1st  specification  of  the  2d  charge.  Not 
guilty  to  the  2d  specification  of  the  2d  charge ;  and  not  guilty  to 
the  2d  charge. 

Not  guilty  to  the  1st  specification  of  the  3d  charge;  and  not 
guilty  to  the  3d  charge. 

Not  guilty  to  the  1st  specification  of  the  4th  charge ;  and  not 
guilty  to  the  4th  charge. 

And,  thereupon,  the  Court  being  ready  to  proceed  with  the 
trial  of  this  cause,  the  Judge  Advocate,  in  support  of  the  issues 
on  his  part,  offers  the  following  evidence  : 

First.  The  Judge  Advocate  reads  to  the  Court  an  agreement  of 
facts  with  the  documents  thereto  appended — made  in  open  Court, 
between  the  Judge  Advocate  and  the  accused,  which  is  in  the 
following  words : 

It  is  agreed  between  the  Judge  Advocate  and  the  accused,  in 
open  Court,  to  admit  the  following  facts,  in  order  to  save  the 
time  and  expense  of  summoning  witnesses. 

First.  The  accused  admits  that  an  article  or  communication 
in  the  words  and  figures,  set  forth  in  the  specifications  in  this 
cause,  was  published  on  the  12th  day  of  July,  1852,  in  the  "  Brook 
lyn  Daily  Eagle,"  a  newspaper  published  in  the  city  of  Brooklyn, 
being  the  same  in  the  specifications  mentioned  ;  which  communi 
cation  is  in  the  following  words,  viz  : 


13 

" Marine  Soldiers" 

"  Mr.  EDITOR  :  A  detachment  of  fine  looking  marine  soldiers  left 
the  city  to-day  for  Norfolk,  by  the  Steamer  Roanoke,  intended  for 
the  guard  of  the  Sloop  St.  Louis,  about  to  join  the  Mediteranean 
squadron.  The  detachment  was  under  the  command  of  that  old 
and  faithful  officer  Lieutenant  Devlin — I  wish  I  could  say  Major, 
as  he  has  earned  that  title  by  bravery  in  much  grater  degree 
than  many  officers  who  received  it.  But  it  is  well  known  that 
flattery  and  the  favor  of  the  stay-at-home  drones  of  headquarters, 
are  much  more  available  than  bravery  in  procuring  promotion 
in  the  marine  corps.  The  writer  of  this  article  saw  the  bravery 
of  Lieutenant  Devlin  put  to  the  test  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec, 
and  well  did  it  stand  the  trial.  While  other  officers  halted  under 
fire  of  the  enemy  and  sat  flat  on  the  ground,  under  cover  of  an 
embankment  topped  with  Maguay  bushes,  he  waved  his  sword, 
that  was  presented  to  him  by  his  friends  in  Brooklyn,  and  told 
the  marines  to  follow  him  and  he  would  lead  them.  Many  of 
them  did  bravely  follow  his  example,  and  were  wounded  or  kill 
ed,  he  himself  received  a  shot  through  his  chin,  the  scar  of  which 
he  will  bear  to  the  grave.  To  his  credit  be  it  said,  that  while 
another  marine  officer,  who  had  command  of  a  storming  party, 
singularly  escaped  without  a  scratch,  he,  Lieutenant  Devlin,  who 
was  quartermaster  on  that  occasion,  and  had  to  crave  permission 
to  leave  his  wagon  train  to  enter  the  fight  as  a  volunteer,  gained 
the  distinguished  credit  of  being  the  only  marine  officer  whose 
blood  flowed  for  his  country  in  the  Valley  of  Mexico,  except  the 
dauntless  Major  Twiggs  who  was  killed  at  the  head  of  his  com 
mand.  As  an  adopted  citizen  I  feel  pride  in  bearing  this  testi 
mony  to  the  bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  in  Mexico,  and  al 
though  not  personally  acquainted  with  that  officer,  I  am  well  ac 
quainted  with  the  facts,  and  stand  prepared  to  substantiate  them 
if  required." 

"AN  OBSERVER." 

Second,  That  the  papers  marked  respectively  No  18  and  19 
are  in  the  handwriting  of  the  accused,  and  hereto  annexed,  viz  : 

No.  18. 

"  Mr.  EDITOR  ;  A  detachment  of  fine  looking  marine  soldiers  left 
this  city  to  day  for  Norfolk,  by  the  Steamer  Roanoke,  intended 
for  the  guard  of  the  Sloop  St.  Louis,  about  to  join  the  Mediter- 
ranian  squadron.  The  detachment  was  under  the  command  of 
that  old  and  faithful  officer  Lieutenant  Devlin — I  wish  I  could 
say  Major,  as  he  has  earned  that  title  by  bravery  in  much  greater 
degree  than  many  officers  who  received  it.  But  it  is  well  known 
that  flattery,  and  the  favor  of  the  '  stay-at-home  drones  of  head 
quarters,'  are  much  more  available  than  bravery  in  procuring 
promotion  in  the  marine  corps.  The  writer  of  this  article  saw 
the  bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  put  to  the  test  at  the  storming 


14 

of  Chapultepec,  and  well  did  it  stand  the  trial.  While  other 
officers  halted  under  the  fire  of  the  enemy  and  sat  flat  on  the 
ground,  under  cover  of  an  embankment  topped  with  Maguay 
bushes,  he  waved  his  sword,  that  was  presented  to  him  by  his 
friends  of  Brooklyn,  and  told  the  marines  to  follow  him  and  he 
would  lead  them.  Many  of  them  did  bravely  follow  his  example, 
and  were  wounded  or  killed.  He  himself  received  a  shot  through 
his  chin,  the  scar  of  which  he  will  bear  to  the  grave.  To  his  credit 
be  it  said,  that  while  another  Marine  officer,  who  had  command 
of  a  storming  party,  singularly  escaped  without  a  scratch,  he, 
Lieutenant  Devlin,  who  was  quartermaster  on  this  occasion,  and 
had  to  crave  permission  to  leave  his  wagon  train  to  enter  the 
fight  as  a  volunteer,  gained  the  distinguished  credit  of  being  the 
only  marine  officer  whose  blood  flowed  for  his  country  in  the  Valley 
of  Mexico,  except  the  dauntless  Major  T \viggs,  who  was  killed 
at  the  head  of  his  command.  As  an  adopted  citizen,  I  feel  a  pride 
in  bearing  this  testimony  to  the  bravery  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  in 
Mexico  ;  and  although  not  personally  acquainted  with  that  officer, 
I  am  well  acquainted  with  the  facts  stated,  and  stand  prepared 
to  substantiate  them  if  required." 

"  AN  OBSERVER." 

No.  19. 

"  NORFOLK,  July  12,  1852* 

"DEAR  SIR:  I  had  intended  to  have  a  few  words  talk  with  you 
on  the  subject  of  the  small  matter  I  entrusted  to  your  care  and 
prudence.  Among  what  things  I  had  to  say  was,  that  you 
might  change  the  matter,  as  it  was  got  up  in  a  hurry,  in  any  way 
you  pleased,  or  you  might,  in  fact,  do  with  it  as  you  pleased,  but 
of  course  leaving  me  certainly  out  of  the  affair.  With  this  view 
I  hope  if  you  moved  in  the  matter  that  you  securely  provided  for 
that  object,  and  that  you  have  destroyed  the  scrap  I  gave  you  as 
a  rough  outline  for  your  guidance.  I  would  be  also  most  sorry 
that  you  should  be  known  in  the  matter,  but  I  suppose  against 
all  these  things  your  prudence  made  sufficient  provision.  I  de 
livered  the  detachment  last  night  between  8  and  9  o'clock,  at  the 
barracks,  this  morning  attended  there,  and  obtained  my  free 
papers.  About  an  hour  since  I  went  on  board  the  '  Oceola'  to 
leave  for  Washington  at  4  o'clock  this  evening,  but  her  appear 
ance  determined  me  to  go  by  way  of  Baltimore,  which  I  shall  do 
this  evening. 

"It  will  afford  me  much  pleasure  to  receive  a  few  lines  from 
you  in  the  quickest  possible  time  at  Washington,  giving  all  par 
ticulars  how  you  managed  that  little  affair. 

"  I  am,  dear  sir,  truly  your  friend, 

Mr.  JAS,  MCGANN.  "  DEVLIN." 

"  You  will  get  this  letter  Wednesday,  and  I  might  have  one 
from  you  on  Thursday.  I  think  I  will  leave  Washington  on 
Friday  or  Saturday. 


15 

*' Which  letter  was  postmarked  with  an  official  stamp  on  it 
and  addressed  as  follows,  viz  : 

"Mr.  JAS.  McGANN, 
"  Near  Marine  Barracks,  Brooklyn,  N.  F." 

Third.  That  the  persons  who  were  stationed  at  Headquarters 
of  the  Marine  Corps  at  the  dates  in  the  specifications  to  the  1st 
charge,  and  in  the  1st  specification  to  the  2d  charge,  are 
correctly  stated  according  to  the  facts  in  the  said  specifications 
respectively. 

And  that  Colonel  Dulany  and  1st  Lieutenant  Isaac  T.  Doughty, 
and  1st  Lieutenant  John  S.  Devlin,  were  the  officers  attached  to 
the  Brooklyn  Barracks  on  the  12th  July,  1852. 

All  which  facts  are  to  be  read  in  evidence  as  if  testified  to  by 
competent  witnesses. 

And  the  Judge  Advocate  produces  Major  John  G.  Reynolds,  a 
lawful  witness  on  behalf  of  the  prosecution,  who  being  duly 
sworn,  answers  as  follows  to  the  following  interrogatories: 

1.  Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

State  to  what  corps  you  belong,  what  your  rank  is  in  such 
corps,  where  you  are  stationed,  and  how  long  you  have  been  so 
stationed  ? 

Ans.  I  am  a  Captain  and  Brevet  Major  of  the  Marine 
Corps.  I  entered  the  corps  26th  May,  1824,  as  2d  Lieutenant,  I 
am  stationed  on  the  recruiting  service  in  the  city  of  New  York. 

2.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  you  are  acquainted  with  the  accused,  how  long 
you  have  known  him,  what  his  rank  is  in  the  Marine  Corps  ? 

Ans.  1  know  the  accused  and  have  known  him  since  1824* 
At  first  in  the  capacity  of  Quarter  Master  Sergeant.  He  was 
then  stationed  in  Washington.  Subsequently  I  have  known  him 
as  a  2d  Lieutenant  of  Marines.  I  have  never  been  stationed 
with  him,  but  he  was  associated  with  me  on  detached  service  in 
the  war  with  Mexico. 

3.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  in  what  capacity  the  accused  acted  when  in  the  Valley 
of  Mexico? 

Ans.  On  that  detached  service  he  was  appointed  as  an  acting 
Assistant  Quarter  Master  and  Commissary  to  the  detachment  of 
marines  acting  with  the  army  in  Mexico* 

4.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  you  were  present,  connected,  and  acting  with 
the  division  of  the  United  States  Army  which  attacked  the  Castle 
of  Chepultepec  in  Mexico;  if  so,  state  when  such  attack  and 
storming  took  place,  and  what  command  you  held  during  such 
attack  and  storming  ? 

Ans.  I  was  present  on  the  10th  or  llth  of  September,  1847* 
A  select  party  was  called  for  by  the  General  of  the  brigade  to 
which  I  was  attached,  as  a  pioneering  storming  party,  to  consist 


16 

of  forty  men  to  be  drawn  from  the  three  regiments  from  New 
York,  Pennsylvania,  and  South  Carolina,  and  six  marines  from 
the  battalion  to  which  I  was  attached.  The  storming  took  place 
on  the  13th  of  September,  1847.  I  commanded  the  pioneering 
storming  party  of  forty  men.  I  was  selected  to  command  them. 
The  position  assigned  to  me  by  General  Quitman  commanding 
the  division,  whose  order  was  repeated  by  General  Shields,  was 
as  follows :  I  was  ordered  to  proceed  on  the  Tacubaya  road  to 
wards  the  Castle,  and  on  my  route  to  arm  my  men  with  the  im 
plements  I  had  selected  the  night  before — ladders,  crowbars,  and 
picks.  After  passing  Drum's  battery,  thirty  or  fifty  paces  to  shel 
ter  myself  and  command  in  the  Maguay  ditch,  till  the  marine 
batfalion  should  pass  me,  when  I  was  to  follow  in  their  rear. 
When  the  battalion  should  get  into  line  and  commence  their  fire, 
I  was  to  advance  with  my  party  under  their  fire. 

5.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether,  and  how  you  executed  these  orders  ? 

(This  question  is  objected  to  by  the  accused  as  immaterial  to 
the  issue,  but  the  objection  is  disallowed.) 

Ans.  I  sheltered  my  command  as  directed,  until  the  passage 
of  the  battalion  of  marines,  after  which  I  followed  in  their  rear, 
which  I  did  for  the  distance  of  several  hundred  yards,  when  the 
battalion  of  marines  was  halted,  and  I  halted  with  them.  Dur 
ing  the  time  (after  my  joining  the  rear  of  the  battalion)  it  was 
under  a  heavy  and  constant  fire  from  the  Castle.  At  the  time  of 
the  halt,  the  fire  was  very  severe.  I  laid  two  ladders  close  to 
gether  over  the  Maguay  ditch,  and  passed  over  towards  the  Cas 
tle,  first  myself,  followed  by  some  seven  or  eight  of  my  command. 
Finding  it  a  clear  and  open  field  beyond  the  bushes,  which,  from 
my  position  to  the  walls  of  the  Castle,  extended  some  two  or 
three  hundred  yards,  and  was  swept  by  a  field  piece  of  the  enemy 
with  grape  shot,  and  by  infantry  on  the  wall,  I  returned  with  my 
party,  finding  it  more  than  useless  to  attempt  an  assault  in  that 
direction,  and  determined  to  wait  till  the  orders  governing  the 
battalion  should  be  carried  out. 

6.  Question  by  the  same. 

,  State  whether  this  course  was  or  was  not  in  accordance  with 
the  orders  of  your  superior  officer,  and  whether  at  any  time  the 
same  was  disapproved  of  by  your  commanding  officer  ? 
,  Ans.  So  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with  them,  as  received  from 
the  lips  of  Colonel  Watson,  the  commanding  officer  of  the  bat 
talion,  this  course  was  according  to  the  orders  of  the  command 
ing  officer.  After  I  had  recrossed  the  ditch,  when  Major  Twiggs 
was  killed,  I  made  application  to  Colonel  Watson  to  move  for 
ward,  and  he  replied,  that  he  halted  by  order  and  could  not  with 
out  futher  orders. 

7.  Question  by  the  same. 

How  long  did  you  maintain  that  position,  and  when  did  you 
leave  it  ? 


17 

Ans.  We  maintained  that  position  some  ten  minutes,  and  did 
foot  leave  it  till  the  flag  was  struck  upon  the  Castle.  The  order 
was  given  by  Colonel  Watson  for  the  troops  to  shelter,  which 
they  did  as  well  as  they  could,  from  the  exposed  position  which 
they  held,  by  means  of  the  Maguay  bushes. 

8.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  what  body  of  troops  Colonel -Watson  commanded  at  the 
time  referred  to  ? 

Ans.  Colonel  Watson  commanded  the  main  body  of  the 
marines  ;  there  were  several  smaller  detachments  of  marines  on 
separate  duty.  My  detachment  was  not  under  command  of  Col. 
Watson,  but  I  was  ordered  independently,  when  the  command  of 
Colonel  Watson  got  into  position,  to  advance  under  their  fire. 
That  position  was  not  ever  assumed  by  Colonel  Watson's  com 
mand. 

9.  Question  by  the  same. 

Would  it  have  been  in  accordance  with  your  order  to  have  ad 
vanced  without  regard  to  the  position  of  Colonel  Watson's  com 
mand? 

Ans.  I  should  have  been  acting  in  violation  of  my  orders  had 
I  done  so  ? 

10.  Question  by  the  same.  ' 

State  whether  you  saw  the  accused  at  any,  and  what  time  of 
the  day  on  the  13th  of  September,  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec 
above  referred  to,  and  whether  he  took  any,  and  what  post,  in  the 
said  attack ;  and  if  any,  in  what  capacity  or  position  he  acted  ? 

Ans.  I  saw  him  after  the  Castle  had  surrendered,  on  my  way 
to  the  gates  of  the  Castle.  I  passed  him.  He  was  sitting  be 
hind  a  tree  from  the  Castle,  with  his  hands  to  his  head.  I  have 
no  knowledge  that  he  had  any  active  position  assigned  to  him 
officially  on  that  day. 

11.  Question  by  the  same. 

Did  he  command  any  detachment  of  marines  in  any  capacity, 
on  that  day  ? 

Ans.     He  did  not  by  any  assignment. 

12.  Question  by  the  same. 

Did  he  call  on  any  portion  of  the  marines  under  your  com 
mand,  or  under  the  command  of  Colonel  Watson,  telling  them  to 
follow  him  and  he  would  lead  them,  while  the  command  of  Wat 
son  was  halted,  as  you  have  above  described  ? 

Ans.  Not  that  I  know  of.  I  did  not  see  him  at  any  time 
while  the  command  was  halted.  If  he  commanded  any  marines, 
they  were  surreptitiously  obtained  and  not  assigned. 

13.  Question  by  the  same. 

During  the  time  of  the  halt  above  described,  did  any  portion  of 
your,  or  of  Watson's  command,  break  their  ranks  and  irregularly 
advance  without  or  against  orders  ? 

Ans.  When  the  command  was  ordered  to  shelter,  the  ranks 
were  already  broken.  The  troops  were  in  column.  The  ranks 
were  broken.  If  any  passed  beyond  that  point,  they  passed  with- 


18 

out  orders.  None  passed  that  I  am  aware  of.  My  position  was 
in  the  rear  of  the  battalion,  and  I  consequently  had  not  an  oppor 
tunity  of  observing  or  judging. 

14.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  what  officers  of  the  Marine  Corps  were  wounded  during 
the  attack  on  Chepultepec  above  mentioned  ? 

Ans.  Captain  Baker  and  myself  are  the  only  two  that  I  per 
sonally  know  to  have  been  there  wounded.  It  was  said  that  the 
accused  and  Lieutenant  Henderson,  were  likewise  wounded  there. 

15.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  any,  and  how  many  of  the  marines  under  your 
command,  were  wounded  or  killed  during  that  attack? 

Ans.  There  were  two  of  the  storming  party  of  marines 
wounded,  and  one  or  two  of  those  drawn  from  the  several  regi 
ments  killed,  and  some  seven  or  eight  wounded  in  the  storming 
party. 

16.  Question  by  the  same. 

Was  there  any  other  Marine  officer  having  command  of  a  storm 
ing  party  on  that  day  beside  you  ? 

Ans.     None  other  had  command  of  a  storming  party. 

17.  Question  by  the  same. 

At  what  point  of  time  was  Major  Twiggs  killed  ? 

Ans.  While  the  troops  were  being  sheltered,  an  officer  from 
the  gear  earne  up  to  where  the  commanding  officer  was  sheltered, 
with  Colonel  Dulany  and  Major  Twiggs,  near  where  I  was,  and 
directed  us  to  go  ahead.  Colonel  Watson  said  he  was  ordered  to 
halt,  and  could  not  move.  About  ten  minutes  afterwards  Major 
Twiggs  got  up  from  the  shelter  and  stepped  to  the  middle  of  the 
road  and  faced  square  to  the  Castle,  and  said,  by  God,  I  am  tired ; 
are  those  your  men,  Reynolds,  or  mine?  whereon  he  immediately 
received  a  mortal  wound.  It  was  then  I  asked  Watson  to  move, 
and  he  repeated  to  me  what  he  bad  already  stated  to  the  officer 
before  mentioned. 

18.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  or  no  the  accused  at  any  time  in  Mexico  after 


the  storming  of  the  Castle  of  Chepultepec,  made  any  threat  of 
+      publishing  anything  relative  to  your  conduct  on  that  occasion; 
and  if  so,  what  he  said  ? 

(The  accused  objects  to  the  above  question  as  irrelevant  under 
the  charges  and  specifications,  there  being  nothing  in  them  point 
ing  to  its  subject  matter.  And  the  Court  having  consulted,  over 
rules  the  objection  and  order  the  question  to  be  put  and  answered.) 

Ans.  He  did  make  such  a  threat.  While  the  Marine  battal 
ion  was  quartered  in  the  city  of  Mexico,  on  the  1st  and  5th  of 
October,  in  the  evening,  between  8  P.  M.  and  3  A.  M.  On  both 
these  days  the  accused  made  such  a  speech,  in  which  he  de 
nounced  me  in  the  following  words :  "  Where  was  Captain  Rey 
nolds  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec ;  he  was  lying  back,  and  I 
am  bold  to  say  it ;  and  on  my  return  to  my  constituents  I  will 
publish  it  in  the  newspapers ;  I  will  publish  it  to  the  world." 


19 

19.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  at  either  time  he  more  particularly  pointed  out 
the  plan  of  the  intended  publication  ? 

Ans.     He  said,  when  I  return  to  my  constituents  at  Brooklyn. 

20.  Question  by  the  same. 

Had  the  accused  ever  resided  in  Brooklyn? 

Ans.  He  resided  at  Brooklyn  at  the  time  that  the  marines 
went  to  Mexico,  and  then  represented  a  ward  of  the  city  as 
Alderman. 

21.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  where  General  Arch.  Henderson,  Commandant  of  the 
Marine  Corps,  was  stationed  during  the  operations  of  the  Marine 
Corps  in  Mexico? 

Ans.     At  Headquarters,  Washington  City. 

(It  is  here  agreed  between  the  Judge  Advocate  and  the  accused, 
that  on  the  12th  July,  1852,  William  A.  Graham  was  Secretary 
of  the  Navy  of  the  United  States,  as  evidence  in  this  trial.) 

22.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  or  not  the  accused  has  for  any,  and  what  length 
of  time,  been  acquainted  with  you? 

Ans.     He  has  known  me  ever  since  1824,  as  before  stated. 

Which  having  been  read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declared  the 
same  correctly  recorded. 

The  Court  adjourned  till  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 


NAVY  YAED,  BROOKLYN,  NEW  YORK, 

10  O'CLOCK,  A.  M.,  September  2,  1852. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court, 
the  Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel- 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  were  read  and  approved. 

Thereupon  the  Judge  Advocate  proceeds  with  the  examination 
of  Major  Reynolds. 

23.  Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

State  where  Major  Aug.  A.  Nicholson  is  now  stationed,  and 
where  he  was  during  the  Mexican  war,  and  what  his  position  is 
in  the  Marine  Corps? 

Ans.  He  is  stationed  at  Headquarters  at  Washington  city, 
and  was  there  stationed  during  the  Mexican  war,  and  was  there, 
and  is  still  Quartermaster  of  the  Marine  Corps. 

24.  Question  by  the  same. 

State  where  Major  Howie  was  stationed,  and  what  his  duties 
were  at  the  above  period  ? 

Ans.  He  was  stationed  at  Headquarters  Washington,  during 
the  Mexican  war,  and  is  so  still,  and  is  Adjutant  and  Inspector 
of  the  Marine  Corps. 


20 

Which  evidence  was  read  over  to  the  witness,  and  declared  by 
him  correct.  And  here  the  Judge  Advocate  closes  the  examina 
tion  in  chief  of  Major  Reynolds.  And  the  accused  submits  an 
application  in  the  following  words,  viz : 

The  accused  makes  the  following  application  to  the  Court : 
That,  the  cross-examination  of  Brevet  Major  J.  G.  Reynolds,  be 
postponed  a  sufficient  time  to  enable  the  Court  to  send  to  Wash 
ington,  D.  C.,  and  procure  a  copy  of  the  examination  of  Brevet 
Major  John  G.  Reynolds'  testimony  given  by  him  before  a  Court 
Martial  in  the  city  of  Mexico,  in  the  month  of  November,  1847, 
upon  a  trial  of  the  accused  before  a  Court  convened  about  that 
date  in  the  city  of  Mexico,  and  hereby  states  under  oath,  that  for 
the  purpose  of  sustaining  his  rights,  defence,  and  properly  cross- 
examining  the  said  witness  on  the  present  trial,  the  said  examina 
tion  and  testimony  are  absolutely  necessary,  and  he  prays  that 
such  cross-examination  be  suspended  accordingly. 

Sworn  to  in  open  Court  this )  T    Q    TYPVT  TAT 

day  of  September,  1852.  | 

HENRY  WINTER  DAVIS. 

And  the  Court  being  cleared  for  deliberation  and  having  de 
liberated,  and  being  opened,  the  opinion  of  the  Court  is  an 
nounced  as  follows : 

The  Court  will  allow  the  accused  to  postpone  for  the  present 
the  cross-examination  of  said  Major  J.  G.  Reynolds  to  enable 
him  to  send  for  the  record  in  the  application  specified,  but  the 
Court  will  not  delay  the  trial  for  that  purpose,  and  require  the 
prosecution  and  defense  to  proceed,  and  if  the  record  be  not  here 
before  the  other  proceedings  are  closed  except  the  cross-exami 
nation  of  said  Reynolds,  the  accused  will  be  required  to  proceed 
with  such  cross-exaination,  or  to  lose  the  benefit  thereof. 

And  the  Judge  Advocate  produces  Colonel  Dulany,  a  lawful 
witness  produced  and  duly  sworn  on  behalf  of  the  prosecution, 
who  testifies  as  follows  to  the  following  interrogatories : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

Look  at  the  paper  marked  No.  19,  and  say  when  and  from 
whom  you  received  it  1 

Ans.  On  my  return  from  Washington  on  the  16th  July,  1852, 
I  had  travelled  all  the  previous  night,  and  went  direct  to  my 
quarters  and  went  to  bed.  On  getting  up  about  2  o'clock,  I  re 
ceived  under  an  envelope  the  official  letters  of  the  post ;  among 
them  I  found  an  open  letter,  which  I  identify  as  this  letter. 
Finding  it  an  open  letter  addressed  to  the  Orderly  Sergeant  of 
the  post  I  supposed  it  to  be  an  official  paper,  and  accordidgly 
read  it.  I  was  at  a  loss  to  know  why  he  sent  it  to  me,  and  he 
said  on  my  asking  him,  he  considered  it  an  act  of  duty. 

Question  by  the  same. 

State  whether  you  ever  had  possession  of  the  paper  marked 
No.  18,  and  if  so,  say  when  and  from  whom  you  obtained  it  1 


21 

Ans.  I  recognize  this  as  a  paper  handed  me  by  the  Orderly 
Sergeant  of  the  post,  which  paper  I  recognize  as  in  the  hand 
writing  of  the  accused  Lieutenant  Devlin,  and  the  paper  was 
delivered  to  me  by  Sergeant  Jas.  McGann,  the  person  to 
whom  the  letter  was  directed.  Upon  my  suggestion,  after  know 
ing  of  the  purport  of  the  letter,  and  to  what  it  referred  I  con 
sidered  it  as  an  act  of  duty  to  get  possession  of  the  paper  No. 
18,  in  my  capacity  of  commanding  officer  of  the  post ;  if  it  could 
be  done  in  no  other  way. 

Here  the  Judge  Advocate  closed  his  examination,  and  the  ac 
cused  propounded  the  following  cross-interrogatories: 

Cross-interrogatory  by  the  accused. 

Cross-question.  On  what  day  did  you  receive  paper  marked 
No.  18,  and  where  did  you  receive  it? 

Ans.  I  received  it  at  corner  of  Park  avenue  and  some  cross 
street  in  Brooklyn,  one  or  two  days,  or  a  few  days  after  getting 
the  letter  No.  19. 

Cross-question  by  the  same. 

Had  you  had  any  previous  interview  with  the  accused  in  re- 
hition  to  the  letter  No.  19  and  paper  No.  18,  before  you  recceived 
paper  No.  18? 

Ans.  I  had  not  spoken  to  Mr.  Devlin  for  some  days  or  weeks 
prior  to  my  leaving  for  Washington,  to  the  best  of  my  recollec 
tion. 

Cross-question  by  the  same. 

When  did  you  leave  for  Washington? 

Ans.  I  left,  I  think,  on  or  about  the  6th  of  July. 

Cross-question  by  accused. 

Did  you,  before  you  received  paper  No.  18,  hold  any  conversa 
tion  with  Sergeant  McGann  in  relation  to  said  paper,  if  so, 
when  and  where  was  such  conversation  ? 

Ans.  I  may  have  had  one  or  two  different  conversations  with 
Sergeant  McGann  and  at  one  or  two  different  places,  but  when 
or  where  exactly  I  do  not  recollect.  The  conversation  was,  if  I 
recollect  aright,  respecting  Sergeant  McGann's  connexion  with 
this  affair. 

And  then  the  accused  closed  his  cross-examination,  and  the 
testimony  having  been  read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declared  the 
same  properly  recorded.  But  begs  leave  to  state  that,  on  further 
reflection,  he  now  recollects  that  one  or  two  of  the  conversations 
above  alluded  to,  with  Sergeant  McGann,  were  at  the  private 
quarters  of  the  witness. 

James  McGann,  a  lawful  witness,  produced  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate,  being  duly  sworn,  answered  as  follows,  to  the  following 
interrogatories . 

Question  by  Judge  Advocate. 

Look  at  paper  No.  18  and  say  whether  said  paper  was  ever 
in  your  possession,  and  if  so,  when,  and  from  whom  you  received 
it,  and  what  you  were  requested  to  do  with  it  ? 


22 

Ans.  The  paper  was  once  in  my  possession.  I  don't  recollect 
the  exact  date,  but  I  think  about  the  10th  day  of  July,  1852. 
And  1  received  it  from  Lieutenant  Devlin.  I  received  it  on  the 
gang  plank  of  the  steamer  Roanoke.  I  think  then  lying  in  the 
city  of  New  York.  Lieutenant  Devlin  said  this  paper  was  put 
into  his  hand  by  some  person  with  that  party's  request  that  it  be 
published  in  the  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle.  Lieutenant  Devlin 
asked  me  if  I  knew  any  person,  or  if  I  would  attend  to  it — 1  and 
he  were  both  just  then  a  good  deal  hurried.  I  had  been  ordered 
to  turn  over  to  Lieutenant  Devlin  a  detachment  of  15  men  and 
one  corpora],  and  I  was  engaged  about  it  then. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Where  were  said  detachment,  and  Lieutenant  Devlin  bound, 
on  board  said  steamer  Roanoke  ? 

Ans.  To  Norfolk,  Virginia. 

Question  by  same. 

What  did  you  do  with  the  paper  No.  18,  handed  you  by  Lieu- 
tenan  Devlin? 

Ans.  I  put  it  in  my  pocket  then,  I  did  not  look  at  nor  read  it 
till  next  day,  Sunday.  When  I  had  read  it  I  copied  it.  On  the 
following  day,  Monday,  morning,  I  handed  it  to  a  young  man,  I 
believe  the  foreman  in  the  office  of  the  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagl  e 
I  had  not  been  requested  to  copy  it. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Look  at  paper  No.  19  and  say  whether  said  paper  was  ever 
in  your  possession,  if  so,  when  you  received  it,  and  how? 

Ans.  I  have  not  a  distinct  recollection  of  the  date,  but  the 
paper  has  been  in  my  possession.  I  received  it,  to  the  best  of 
my  recollection,  on  the  morning  of  the  15th  day  of  July,  1852. 
It  came  through  the  post-office. 

Question  by  same. 

State  what  you  did  with  letter  No.  19,  when  you  received  it. 

Ans.  I  kept  it  in  my  pocket,  or  some  where,  for  1  think  a  couple 
of  days ;  I  then  handed  it  with  other  papers  to  the  wife  of 
Lieutenant  Colonel  Dulany. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Where  was  Lieutenant  Colonel  Dulany  at  the  time  you  so 
handed  it  to  his  wife  ? 

Ans.  I  am  not  certain  that  he  was  in  the  house  at  that  mo 
ment,  but  I  knew  he  had  returned  from  Washington  that  morn 
ing,  and  it  was  for  the  purpose  of  being  handed  to  Colonel 
Dulany  that  I  handed  the  paper  to  his  wife. 

Question  by  the  same. 

State  to  what  matter  the  said  letter  marked  No.  19  related, 
to  what  other  paper  or  rough  draft,  given  you  by  said  Lieute 
nant  Devlin  ? 

To  this  question  the  accused  objects,  but  .the  question  is  or 
dered  to  be  put  by  the  Court. 

Ans.  Speaking  conscientiously,  I  must  say  I  dont  know  to  what 
other  paper  than  paper  No.  18  it  could  refer;  but  I  cannot  say 
that  it  does  refer  to  that. 


23 

And  then  the  Judge  Advocate  closes  the  examination  of  Ser 
geant  McGann,  and  rests  his  cause.  And  the  accused  declining 
to  cross-examine  the  said  witness,  and  the  said  evidence  having 
been  read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declares  the  same  to  be  correct 
ly  recorded. 

And  thereupon  the  Judge  Aduacate  calls  the  accused  to  proceed 
with  his  case,  and  produce  his  testimony  if  any  he  desires  to  offer 
to  sustain  the  issues  joined  on  his  part. 

And  thereupon  the  accused  appealed  to  the  Court  for  time  to 
prepare  his  case  till  to-morrow  morning,  in  order  that  he  and  the 
Judge  Advocate  may  settle  the  interrogatories  for  the  examina 
tion  of  General  A.  Henderson  and  John  Roache,  witnesses  at 
the  Marine  Barracks,  Washington,  D.  C.,  to  save  the  time  and 
expense  of  obtaining  their  presence  for  the  accused ;  and  there 
upon  the  Court,  for  that  purpose,  agrees  to  allow  of  the  delay, 
and  adjourns  till  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 


NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN,  NEW  YORK, 

September  3,  1852,  10  o'clock,  a.  m. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment.  Present,  the  Eresi- 
dent  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court,  the  Judge  Advocate, 
the  accused  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  were  read  over  and  approved. 
And  thereupon  the  Judge  Advocate  calls  upon  the  accused  to 
proceed  with  his  defense. 

And  the  accused,  to  sustain  the  issue  on  his  part,  produces  and 
reads  in  evidence  to  the  Court,  the  part  of  the  agreement  between 
him  and  the  Judge  Advocate  relating  to  his  testimony,  the  other 
part  having  been  read  yesterday,  the  part  now  read  being  as  fol 
lows,  viz  : 

And  the  Judge  Advocate  on  his  part  admits  that  Captain  Silas 
Casey,  if  present,  would  testify  to  the  effect  of  the  contents  of 
the  printed  paper  hereto  annexed  and  marked  A,  purporting  to  be 
a  paper  from  the  said  Casey,  dated  22d  September,  1847,  which 
statement  is  to  be  read  o>i  behalf  of  the  accused,  subject  to  all 
legal  exceptions  as  to  the  competency  of  the  contents,  as  if  said 
Casey  were  present,  the  accused  waiving  the  right  to  call  said 
Casey  as  a  witness  in  this  case. 

The  Judge  Advocate  also  admits,  the  printed  paper  marked  B, 
as  evidence  of  the  order  it  purports  to  contain,  subject  to  legal 
exceptions  to  the  relevancy  and  competency  of  the  matter  thereof. 
HENRY  WINTER  DAVIS,  Judge  Advocate, 
J.  S.  DEVLIN. 

The  original  whereof  is  hereto  annexed  marked  No.  20,  to 
gether  with  the  said  papers  therein  referred  to. 

And  the  accused  further  read  the  said  papers  in  the  said  agree 
ment  mentioned  as  annexed  hereto,  and  marked  A  and  B,  which 
are  in  the  following  words,  viz : 


24 

A. 

MEXICO,  September  23,  1847. 

SIR  :  I  have  just  received  your  communication  of  the  22d  inst.,, 
and  although  still  confined  to  my  bed,  will  endeavor  to  comply 
with  the  request  of  the  General.  On  the  12th  inst.,  I  was  placed 
in  command  of  250  picked  men  and  volunteers  of  the  2d  division 
of  regulars,  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  storming  party  in  the 
attack  on  the  castle  of  Chepultepec.  By  direction  of  the  Gen- 
eral-in-chief,  I  reported  (on  the  evening  of  the  12th)  to  Major 
General  Quitman  for  orders.  I  organized  the  party  in  six  divi 
sions,  corresponding  to  the  different  regimental  detachments  of 
which  it  was  composed.  The  first  division  was  commanded  by 
Captain  Roberts,  of  the  rifles,  the  second  by  Lieutenant  Haskins, 
1st  artillery,  the  third  by  Captain  Dobbins,  of  the  3d  infantry, 
the  4th  by  Lieutenant  Hill,  of  the  4th  artillery,  the  5th  by  Lieu 
tenant  Wescott,  of  the  2d  infantry,  and  the  61  h  by  Captain  Paul, 
of  the  7th  infantry.  Having  been  provided  with  scaling  ladders, 
crowbars,  powder  bags,  and  all  the  necessary  implements,  on  the 
morning  of  the  13th  inst.,  as  directed  by  the  General,  I  followed 
the  marines  in  the  direction  of  the  castle.  Soon  after  passing 
Captain  Drum's  battery  we  entered  a  ditch  on  the  left  side  of  the 
road,  the  enemy  opening  quite  a  brisk  fire,  but  which  from  our 
position  did  no  injury.  In  a  short  time  the  marines  in  our 
front  halted ;  on  perceiving  which,  I  ordered  the  storming  party 
to  take  the  road  and  pass  them.  My  orders  were  promptly 
obeyed,  and  they  gallantly  advanced  up  the  road  under  a  galling 
and  destructive  fire.  On  arriving  near  the  causeway,  I  received 
a  wound  in  the  abdomen,  by  which  I  was  unable  further  to  con 
duct  the  operations  of  the  storming  party.  The  command  de 
volved  on  Captain  Paul,  of  the  7th  regiment,  next  to  me  in  rank. 
After  being  wounded,  I  managed  to  reach  a  rancho  on  the  road 
side,  a  short  distance  in  our  rear,  where  I  remained  until  the  ac 
tion  was  over,  using  what  strength  remained  to  me  in  urging  for 
ward  the  stragglers  who  stopped  there. 

From  the  peculiar  and  desperate  nature  of  the  service,  and 
their  zealous  co-operation,  I  would  recommend  the  officers  com 
posing  the  storming  party,  to  the  special  notice  of  the  Command 
ing-general.  Captain  Roberts,  by  his  position  as  commanding  the 
leading  division  of  the  column,  more  particularly  attracted  my 
attention.  From  what  I  myself  witnessed,  and  from  the  testi 
mony  of  others,  he,  by  his  activity,  zeal,  and  gallantry,  merits  the 
highest  praise. 

S.  CASEY, 
2d  Infantry,  Commanding  Storming  Party. 

F.  N.  PAGE,  Assistand  Adjutant  General. 


25 

B. 

GENERAL  ORDER,  No.  3. 

WAR  DEPARTMENT,  ADJUTANT  GENERAL'S  OFFICE, 

Washington,  January  28,  1847. 

The  following  regulations  has  been  received  from  the  War 
Department : 

WAR  DEPARTMENT,  January  28,  1847. 

The  President  of  the  United  States  directs  that  paragraph  650, 
of  the  general  regulations  for  the  army,  established  on  the  1st 
March,  1825,  and  not  included  among  those  published  January 
25,  1841,  be  now  republished,  and  that  its  observance  as  a  part 
of  the  general  regulations  be  strictly  enjoined  upon  the  army. 
By  order  of  the  President, 

W.  L.  MARCY,  Secretary  of  War. 


The  following  is  the  paragraph  of  the  general  regulations  for 
the  army  established  the  1st  March,  1825,  referred  to  above: 

650.  Private  letters  or  reports  relative  to  military  marches  and 
operations,  are  frequently  mischievous  in  their  designs,  and  always 
disgraceful  to  the  army.  They  are,  therefore,  strictly  forbidden  : 
and  any  officer  found  guilty  of  making  such  reports  for  publica 
tion,  without  special  permission,  or  of  placing  the  writing  beyond 
his  control,  so  that  it  finds  its  way  to  the  press,  within  one  month 
after  the  termination  of  the  campaign  to  which  it  relates,  shall 
be  dismissed  from  the  service. 

By  order, 

W.  G.  FREEMAN, 

Assistant  Adjutant  General. 

The  accused  further  proves  by  the  certificate  of  Richard  Mc- 
Sherry,  Passed  Assistant  Surgeon,  U.  S.  Navy,  and  acting  Surgeon 
ot  Marines,  that  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin  received  a  severe  gun 
shot  through  the  chin  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec,  which  is 
admitted  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  and  is  in  the  following  words : 

"MARINE  BARRACKS,  CITY  OF  MEXICO,  Feb.  8,  1848. 
"  I  hereby  certify  that  Lieutenant  John  S.  Devlin,  U.  S.  Marine 
Corps,  received  a  severe  gunshot  wound  through  the  chin  at  the 
storming  of  Chepultepec. 

"The  wound  was  obstinate  in  healing, until  a  ball,  or  a  portion 
of  one,  perhaps  one  of  the  split  balls  said  to  be  used  by  the  Mexi 
cans,  was  extracted. 

"After  this  the  healing  went  on  rapidly.  Mr.  Devlin  was  then 
Acting  Commissary  and  Quartermaster,  and  on  that  occasion  was 
a  volunteer  aid  of  General  Shields. 

"RICHARD  McSHERRY, 
"Passed  Asst.  Surg.  U.  S.  N.,  and  Acting  Surg.  of  Marines." 


26 

The  accused  further  reads  the  following  agreement  between 
the  acaused  and  the  Judge  Advocate,  in  open  Court : 

"It  is  agreed  that  the  accused  was  tried  on  specification  2d 
and  4th,  of  charge  2d,  which  are  hereto  annexed,  and  sentenced 
to  be  cashiered,  which  was  remitted  by  the  President,  and  that 
the  said  specifications,  charge,  and  finding,  may  be  read  in  evi 
dence  from  the  printed  statement,  as  if  the  record  were  produced. 

"HENRY  WINTER  DAVIS, 
"J.  D." 

And  the  specifications  and  charge  and  finding,  an/1  sentence  re 
ferred  to  in  the  agreement,  are  read  to  the  Court,  and  are  in  the 
following  words,  viz : 

CHARGE  II. 
Conduct  unbecoming  an  officer  and  a  gentleman. 

Specification  2. 

In  this  that  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  of  the  Marine  Corps, 
did  on  or  about  the  22d  September,  1847,  while  in  a  state  of  in 
toxication,  in  the  presence  of  several,  and  in  the  hearing  of  many 
of  the  officers  quartered  with  the  regiment  in  the  city  of  Mexico, 
use  disrespectful  and  reproachful  language  in  regard  to  Captain 
J.  G.  Reynolds  of  said  corps,  in  reference  to  the  storming  of  Che- 
pultepec,  in  the  following  words,  viz ;  "  Where  was  Captain 
Reynolds,  with  his  storming  party ;  he  was  lying  back  ;  I  am  bold 
in  the  assertion ;  I  am  not  afraid  to  say  it,  gentlemen ;  and  when 
I  go  back  to  Brooklyn  I  will  make  it  known  in  the  public  news 
papers,"  or  words  to  that  effect,  and  thus  continued  his  harrangue 
for  a  long  time,  the  whole  discourse  reflecting  upon  the  charac 
ter  and  reputation  of  the  said  Captain  Reynolds. 

Specification  4. 

In  this  that  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  of  the  Marine  Corps, 
did  on  or  about  the  1st  of  October,  1847,  at  the  Marine  quarters 
in  the  city  of  Mexico,  use  reproachful  and  disrespectful  language 
directed  to  the  said  Captain  Reynolds,  by  name,  to  wit :  "  Where 
was  Captain  Reynolds,  with  his  storming  party,  at  Chepultepec  ; 
he  was  lying  back ;  I  am  bold  in  the  assertion ;  I  am  not  afraid  to 
say  it,  gentlemen,  and  when  I  go  back  to  Brooklyn  I  will  make  it 
known  in  the  public  newspapers,"  or  words  to  that  effect. 

The  Court  found  the  accused  as  follows:  Of  the  2d  specifica 
tion  to  the  2d  charge,  Guilty,  except  the  words  "  while  in  a  state 
of  intoxication,"  and  the  whole  of  the  4th  specification  to  the  2d 
charge,  Guilty. 

The  Court,  does  sentence  him,  1st  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  of 
the  U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  to  be  cashiered. 

Which  paper,  printed,  is  annexed,  marked  No.  22. 


27 

And  the  accused  produced  to  the  Court  Lieutenant  Jabez  C. 
Rich,  a  witness  on  his  behalf,  who  being  duly  sworn,  testifies  as 
follows,  to  the  following  interrogatories : 

Question  by  the  accused. 

Are  you  acquainted  with  the  accused,  and  how  long  have  you 
known  him? 

Ans.  I  am  acquainted  with  him,  and  have  known  him  since 
1847. 

Question  by  same. 

Were  you  present  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec ;  and  if  so, 
did  you  see  the  accused  there  ? 

Ans.     I  was,  and  did  see  him  there. 

Question  by  same. 

Look  at  the  annexed  diagram  of  the  said  battle,  and  say  if  you 
saw  Major  Reynolds  there,  and  designate  the  place  where  you 
saw  him,  on  the  diagram,  and  the  particular  situation  in  which 
he  was  placed.  The  diagram  is  marked  No.  31  ? 

Ans.  I  did  see  Major  Reynolds  on  that  day,  and  his  position 
when  I  saw  him,  was  at  the  point  marked  by  a  dot  on  the  plat, 
between  A.  and  M.  As  to  his  particular  situation,  after  a  period 
of  five  years,  I  cannot  distinctly  recollect.  My  impression  is,  that 
when  I  last  saw  him  he  was  sitting  down  on  the  roadside. 

Question  by  same. 

Did  you  on  the  occasion  referred  to  see  any  officers  sitting  or 
lying  on  the  ground;  if  you  did,  state  the  particular  place  on  the 
diagram,  and  the  names  of  the  officers,  and  the  time  ? 

Ans.  I  cannot  state  particularly  the  time ;  I  had  just  been  re 
lieved  from  guard.  It  was  just  before  the  assault  was  made ; 
about  eight  or  nine  o'clock  in  the  morning.  Certainly  not  later 
than  that.  In  passing  around  the  plan  designated  by  the  dot  on 
the  diagram,  I  saw  sitting  on  the  ground,  Colonel  Watson,  com 
mandant  of  the  regiment,  Major  Dulany,  and  perhaps  some 
others  not  now  recollected.  Perhaps  I  had  better  state  that  at 
this  time  the  whole  command  were  sitting  down,  and  doing  so 
by  command,  to  protect  themselves  from  a  very  heavy  fire  from 
the  enemy. 

Question  by  same. 

Did  you  see  Major  Reynolds  there  ? 

Ans.  My  impression  is  that  Major  Reynolds  was  there,  but  in 
the  rear  of  Colonel  Watson  and  Major  Dulany,  some  twenty  or 
thirty  feet,  and  near  where  Major  Twiggs  was  shot,  which  was 
near  the  left  of  the  regiment. 

Question  by  same. 

How  do  you  hnow  the  fact  that  the  command  was  sitting 
down  by  orders  ? 

Ans.  Only  by  common  report.  It  was  perfectly  understood 
throughout  the  army  that  the  signal  for  our  assault  should  be 
the  cessation  of  our  cannonade  on  the  castle.  I  sat  down  myself, 
and  made  my  men  sit  down  because  I  understood  it  to  be  the 
order. 


28 

Question  by  same. 

Was  Major  Reynolds  sitting  or  standing  when  you  saw  him  on 
the  occasion  referred  to? 

Ans.  I  cannot  say  ;  I  think  sitting.  In  fact  I  am  very  sure  he  was. 

Question  by  same. 

How  near  the  Maguay  bushes  were  the  officers  you  saw  sitting 
down? 

Ans.  I  suppose  some  two  or  three  feet — as  near  as  you  could 
get  to  the  embankment.  They  formed  some  shelter  so  far  as 
sight  was  concerned,  but  no  shelter  against  shot;  my  orderly 
sergeant  was  shot  right  alongside  of  me ;  he  was  not  killed. 

Question  by  same. 

Where  did  you  see  the  accused  upon  the  occasion  referred  to 
in  the  former  questions  ? 

Ans.  I  saw  him  near  the  Castle  gate  after  the  point  of  time  at 
which  I  had  seen  the  other  officers  sitting  down.  It  was  just 
during  the  storming  by  our  party.  General  Pillow  having  al 
ready  entered  the  castle  from  the  other  side.  I  had  passed 
around  the  point  marked  by  the  dot,  with  some  few  men — part 
of  my  company.  As  I  passed  I  saw  the  accused  considerably 
ahead  of  myself  and  of  any  of  the  marines,  waving  his  sword, 
and  with  a  red  handkerchief  in  his  hand  at  the  same  time. 
How  long  he  had  been  round  there  I  don't  know.  I  moved  my 
self  because  I  had  been  informed  by  Captain  Casey,  the  aid  of 
General  Shields,  that  the  orders  were  to  advance.  I  make  this 
explanation  in  order  to  show  how  I  came  to  advance  without 
orders  from  the  commandant  of  the  regiment. 

Question  by  same. 

Do  you  know  of  any  other  marine  officer  besides  accused, 
whose  blood  flowed  by  a  wound  received  in  the  field  of  battle  in 
the  valley  of  Mexico;  and  if  so,  state  the  name  of  such  officer? 

Ans.  I  do  not.  Lieutenant  Baker  reported  himself  as  wound 
ed  to  the  surgeon,  but  whether  wounded  or  not,  I  don't  know. 
We  all  know,  of  course,  Twiggs  was  killed. 

Qestion  by  same. 

How  far  distant  was  the  marine  battalion  from  the  Castle  of 
Chapultepec  when  it  surrrendered,  and  where  was  the  storming 
party  of  forty  pioneers  and  Captain  Reynolds  at  that  time  ? 

Ans.  I  can't  be  exact,  but  they  were  within  musket  shot. 

Question  by  same. 

Did  or  did  not  the  accused,  in  company  with  you,  call  on  Gen 
eral  Shields  at  the  village  of  Coyacan,  in  Mexico,  two  or  three 
days  before  the  attack  on  Chepultepec,  and  request  General 
Shields  to  assign  him  for  duty  in  the  storming 'party  then  being 
organized  ? 

Ans.  Yes,  but  I  don't  think  it  was  two  or  three  days ;  it  was 
but  one  day  before. 

Question  by  same. 

How  do  you  know  that  Lieutenant  Baker  reported  himself 
wounded,  and  in  what  part  of  his  body  did  he  report  himself 
wounded,  and  did  his  wound  prevent  him  from  doing  duty  ? 


29 

Ans.  He  was  on  the  official  list  of  killed  and  Wounded.     It 
did  not  prevent  him  from  doing  duty. 
Question  by  same. 

Did  you  or  did  you  not  know,  or  was  it  generally  understood, 
that  the  signal  you  have  just  alluded  to  of  the  cannon  ceasing  to 
play  on  the  Castle,  was  intended  as  a  signal  for  marching  in  the 
morning  from  Tacubaya  or  near  Drum's  battery,  and  not  as  a 
signal  to  remain  in  shelter  at  the  advanced  point  where  the  ma 
rines  halted  and  sat  down? 

Ans.  I  understood  it  to  be  the  signal  to  advance  to  the  attack. 
I  never  saw  the  order.  I  got  this  order  from  my  commanding 
officer  as  above  described.  I  was  on  the  left  of  the  column,  in 
command  of  my  company  under  Colonel  Watson,  on  the  morning 
of  the  attack,  after  I  was  relieved  from  guard. 
Question  by  same» 

Do  you  know  whether  Major  Reynolds  was  wounded  at  Che* 
pultepec  ;  if  so,  say  how  and  when  ? 

Ans.  1  do  not  know.     Not  to  my  knowledge. 
Question  by  same. 

Was  or  was  not  Captain  Reynolds^  with  his  pioneer  storming 
party,  immediately  present,  assisting  at  the  reduction  of  Chepul* 
tepee;  and  if  so,  state  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  assistance 
he  rendered  ? 

Ans.  I  presume  he  was  present,  but  the  Castle  was  taken  long 
before  any  of  the  marines  had  anything  to  do  with  the  storming 
of  it. 

The  accused  offers  the  following  question,  viz :  Do  you  not 
know  it  was  a  common  subject  of  remark  at  the  time,  among  the 
officers  immediately  after  the  battle  of  Chepultepec,  that  Cap 
tain,  but  now  Major  Reynolds,  with  his  pioneer  party,  remained 
in  the  rear  during  the  action  ? 

To  which  question  the  Judge  Advocate  objects,  and  it  is  not 
allowed  to  be  put  by  the  Court. 
Question  by  same. 

Did  the  marines,  during  the  action,  fire  on  the  enemy  while 
the  officers  were  in  shelter ;  if  yea,  by  whose  order  and  in  what 
order  of  battle  ? 

Ans.  The  marines  fired  on  the  enemy,  and  by  order  of  their 
commanding  officers,  I  suppose.    They  were  sitting  on  the  ground, 
or  lying  down;  loaded  their  guns,  and  got  up  and  fired  as  fast  as 
they  could,  the  battalion  being  in  line. 
Question  by  same. 

Was  you  present  taking  an  active  part  as  an  officer  of  marines 
during  the  whole  time  the  battalion  of  marines  was  in  Mexico, 
and  to  the  end  of  hostilities? 

Ans.  I  landed  with  the  marines,  and  staid  for  three  or  four 

months  after  the  surrender  of  the  city,  but  left  before  the  treaty* 

Here  the  accused  closed  the  examination  of  the  witness,  and 

the  Judge  Advocate  propounded  the  following  cross-interroga1- 

tories : 


30 

Cross-question  by  Judge  Advocate. 

At  what  hour  were  you  relieved  from  guard  on  the  morning 
of  the  13th  September,  1847,  and  what  officer  relieved  you? 

Ans.  I  was  not  relieved  by  any  one.  The  guards  were  broken 
up  and  the  men  retired  to  their  various  regiments.  I  was  acting 
while  on  guard  under  Major  Dulany,  who  was  filed  officer  of  the 
day. 

Cross-questioned  by  same. 

Had  Captain  Casey  the  command  of  any  particular  body  of 
troops  in  the  attack  upon  Chepultepec  ? 

Ans.  I  am  not  aware  that  he  had.  I  know  him  to  be  an  aid 
of  one  of  the  Generals. 

Question  by  Captain  H.  B.  Tyler,  a  member  of  the  Court. 

State  whether  Captain  Casey  gave  you  the  order  to  advance 
when  he  was  passing  with  his  command  ;  or  when,  and  in  what 
capacity  ? 

Ans.  I  have  already  stated  that  I  am  not  aware  that  he  had 
any  command.  When  I  first  saw  him,  it  was  when  the  marine 
battalion  were  sitting  or  lying  on  the  ground  under  the  bushes. 
He  came  from  the  rear,  and  of  course  reached  me  before  reach 
ing  any  other  marine  officer,  1  being  on  the  left,  and  said  to  me 
what  are  you  doing  here,  why  do  you  not  advance?  I  replied  to 
him,  I  have  no  orders,  he  said,  I  give  you  the  order,  sir,  and  I  am 
empowered  to  order  everybody  to  advance. 

Question  by  same. 

Were  you  not  part  of  Colonel  Watson's  command,  and  if  yea, 
how  could  you  pass  beyond  Colonel  Watson's  command,  Captain 
Casey  being  junior  to  Colonel  Watson? 

Ans.  I  can  simply  state  it  was  in  the  excitement  of  an  action ; 
we  had  been  under  fire  for  four  or  five  hours,  and  it  was  done 
under  the  excitement  of  the  moment. 

Question  by  Judge  Advocate. 

State  whether  Captain  Casey  was  moving  alone  at  the  time  of 
the  order  as  an  aid,  or  had  he  any  men  following  under  his  order? 

Ans.  He  was  alone  at  the  time  the  order  was  given.  The 
New  York  regiment,  however,  was  then  passing  on  towards  the 
Castle,  or  had  already  passed.  Some  of  the  men  in  passing  said, 
why  don't  you  corne  along,  and  laughed. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

State  what  the  reply  of  General  Shields  was  to  Lieutenant 
Devlin's  request  to  be  assigned  to  duty  with  the  storming  party 
referred  to? 

Ans.  I  do  not  know  what  the  General  did  upon  the  request. 
He  was  acting  during  the  action  as  aid  to  General  Shields. 

Question  by  the  Court. 

Did  the  New  York  regiment  pass  the  whole  force  of  the  ma 
rines,  or  did  it  only  pass  the  left  of  the  line  where  you  were  ? 

Ans.  They  did  pass  the  whole  marine  battalion  to  the  right, 
and  then  turned  to  the  left  towards  the  Castle. 

Cross-question  by  same. 


31 

Please  look  at  the  paper  now  shown  you,  signed  by  you  ap 
parently,  and  say  if  it  be  signed  by  you,  and  if  so,  state  what 
your  recollection  of  the  facts  relative  to  the  passing  of  the  ma 
rine  battalion  above  referred  to  is  after  reading  it,  the  paper  is 
marked  No.  28  ? 

Ans.  It  is  signed  by  me.  My  recollection  of  the  facts  is  the 
same  as  above  stated.  I  refer  particularly  in  that  paper  to  Casey's 
claiming  to  have  passed  them  with  a  storming  party.  It  refers 
also  to  the  time  when  the  marines  were  in  action,  and  not  to  the 
time  when  they  were  lying  down  before  they  were  ordered  into 
action.  After  they  were  in  action  they  were  passed  by  no  troops. 

And  here  the  examination  is  closed,  and  the  testimony  being 
read  to  the  witness  he  declares  the  same  to  be  correct. 

And  Captain  Terrett  being  duly  sworn  on  behalf  of  the  accused, 
testifies  as  follows  to  the  following  interrogatories — 

Question  by  accused. 

State  if  you  are  acquainted  with  the  accused,  and  how  long 
you  have  known  him.  and  whether  you  were  with  him  in  Mexico 
at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec,  and  what  position  he  held  in  the 
marine  corps  then,  and  what  was  the  position  of  said  Lieutenant 
Devlin,  and  Major  Reynolds,  and  Colonel  Dulany,  and  other  officers 
at  the  storming,  by  reference  to  the  diogram ;  and  state  the 
whole  operations  of  the  said  Lieutenant  Devlin,  and  of  said  Major 
Reynolds,  during  such  storming  of  Chepultepec,  and  whether 
either  of  them,  and  any  others  were  wounded  then  ? 

Ans.  I  am  acquainted  with  him,  and  have  known  him  some 
20  or  2*2  years.  1  was  with  him  in  Mexico  at  that  time.  He 
was  acting  Assistant  Quartermaster  and  Commissary  of  the  mar 
ine  battalion.  When  we  were  ordered  to  proceed  on  the  Tacubaya 
road  towards  the  Castle,  Lieutenant  Devlin  was  with  me  till  I  had 
nearly  reached  the  angle  of  the  road.  When  Lieutenant  Devlin 
disappeared  ahead  of  me,  he  had  his  sword  drawn,  waving  it  over 
his  head  and  cheering.  When  I  reached  the  angle  marked  by 
the  dot  on  the  diagram,  I  halted  on  receipt  of  an  order  to  that 
effect  from  the  rear,  and  ordered  my  men  to  sit  or  kneel,  as  I  un 
derstood  it  to  be  ordered.  I  did  not  see  him  again  during  the  day ; 
to  the  best  of  my  recollection  he  had  not  command  ot  any  men 
when  he  disappeared.  A  few  minutes  after  halting,  I  cast  my 
eyes  to  the  rear,  and  there  I  saw  Major  Twiggs  fall,  about  15 
or  20  paces  in  my  rear.  I  then  observed  Major  Reynolds,  Colonel 
Watson,  and  other  officers,  I  suppose  25  or  30  paces  in  my  rear 
in  a  sitting  or  kneeling  position.  My  time  was  so  taken  up  by 
the  command,  my  position  being  on  the  extreme  right,  that  I  did 
not  again  observe  the  party  in  my  rear.  The  men  were  some 
what  straggling  owing  to  the  rapidity  of  the  advance.  Lieuten 
ant  Devlin's  cheering  may  have  operated  to  encourage  the  men. 
Major  Reynolds  and  the  other  officers  were  some  five  or  six  paces 
from  the  Maguay  bushes.  I  was  separated  from  my  battalion, 
when  the  rest  of  them  entered  the  Castle,  I,  with  a  party  of  men 
was  in  pursuit  of  the  enemy  on  the  San  Cosine  road,  and  did  not 


32 

enter  the  Castle.  During  the  halt  at  the  angle  of  the  road, 
troops,  of  what  command  I  don't  know,  marched  up  to  near  my 
position  at  the  corner  of  the  road,  filed  to  the  right  away  from 
the  Castle  and  broke. 

The  paper  handed  to  the  witness  for  the  purpose  of  showing  a 
different  statement  made  by  him  at  a  former  period^  relative  to 
the  passing  of  the  marine  battalion  by  other  troops  on  the  occa 
sion  referred  to,  (and  for  that  purpose  only,  the  paper  is  marked 
No.  26,)  and  is  in  the  following  words,  viz : 

CITY  OF*  MEXICO,  March  14,  1848. 

Mr.  EDITOR  :  A  statement  has  been  published  by  Captain  Casey, 
2d  Regiment  of  Infantry,  which,  whether  wilfully  or  hot,  reflects 
most  seriously  upon  the  corps  to  which  we  have  the  honor  to  be^ 
long.  The  facts  of  the  case  are  simply  these:  The  marines,  in 
stead  of  halting,  were  halted  by  order  of  General  Quit  man,  and 
so  far  from  not  being  ready  to  advance,  did,  at  the  attack,  move 
Without  orders,  the  officers  of  companies  having  much  difficulty 
in  restraining  the  men  from  making  a  rush. 

The  marines  were  not  passed  by  any  body  of  men.  Certainly 
not  by  the  storming  party  of  Captain  Casey,  nor  were  they  in  the 
back  ground  at  any  time  during  the  storming  of  Chepultepec* 
The  statement  and  inference  of  Captain  Cnsey  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding:  all  who  were  there  acted  nobly,  and  we  cannot 
conceve  why  Captain  Casey  should  make  a  public  attack  upon  a 
body  of  men,  any  one  of  whose  officers  are  ready  and  willing  to 
defend  their  oWn  honor  and  that  of  the  corps.  And  many  of 
whom  have  seen  more  of  actual  service,  both  at  home  and 
abroad,  than  Captain  Casey  and  those  who  are  willing  to  give 
Credit  to  his  statements  ever  dreamed  of. 

It  may  be  that  this  statement  has  been  caused  by  the  accusa^ 
tion,  totally  unfounded,  which  was  made  by  an  officer  against 
another  officer,  having  command  of  a  special  storming  party  at* 
tached  to  Major  Twiggs*  light  battalion.  It  has  been  proved 
most  positively  that  that  officer  was  where  he  was  ordered  to  be. 

We  are  yet  to  learn  by  what  rule  of  military  discipline,  a  junior 
officer  presumes  to  criticise  the  action  or  motives  of  his  superiors, 
ignorant  as  he  must  necessarily  be,  of  his  orders  or  motives  of  ac 
tion.  The  officer  commanding  the  special  storming  party,  composed 
of  forty  men,  made  up  from  the  volunteer  division  under  General 
Quitman,  to  wit:  New  York,  2d  Pennsylvania,  South  Carolina, 
and  a  small  portion  from  our  own  little  battalion,  receiving  orders 
from  General  Quitman  and  Shields.  This  officer  has  ever  been 
taught  to  obey  orders  under  any  and  every  contingency. 
Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servants, 

(Signed)  JNO.  GEO.  REYNOLDS,  Capt.  Marines. 

GEO.  H.  TERRETT, 
J.  C.  RICH,      1st  Lieut. 
W.  L.  YOUNG,    " 

Which  being  read,  the  Court  adjourned  till  to*morrow  morning 
at  10  o'clock* 


S3 

NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN,  NEW  YORK, 

10  O'CLOCK,  September  4,  1862. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  Judge  Advocate,  the 
Bccused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  were  read. 

Whereupon  the  accused  objects  to  the  same  as  improperly  con 
taining  the  paper  put  into  Lieutenant  Rich's  hands,  and  signed 
by  him  for  the  purpose  stated,  in  the  following  words,  viz : 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  objects  to  the  record  of  yesterday's 
proceedings  as  read  this  morning. 

The  paper  read  by  the  Judge  Advocate  forms  no  part  of  the 
proceedings.  The  paper  having  been  put  into  his  hands,  not  as 
evidence,  but  as  a  memoranda  for  the  purpose  of  refreshing  the 
witness's  recollection,  which  was  not  read.  It  cannot  be  used  for 
the  purpose  of  impeaching  the  witness,  because  the  statement  con 
tained  in  the  paper  is  immaterial,  more  especially  as  he  subse 
quently  explained  it,  and  the  memoranda  is  not  in  witness's  hand 
writing,  nor  is  there  any  evidence  he  ever  read  it, 

A  memoranda  made  by  the  witness  cotemporaneous  with  the 
transaction,  and  so  made  under  his  direction  at  the  time,  may  be 
looked  at  by  the  witness  to  refresh  his  memory,  but  not  for  the 
purpose  of  making  the  memoranda  evidence,  or  even  part  of  the 
record,  the  accused  asks  to  have  that  part  of  the  record  expunged. 
And  this  is  asked  immediately  after  the  record  of  yesterday. 

But  the  Court  considered  the  paper  aforesaid  properly  included 
in  the  proceedings  of  yesterday,  for  the  purpose  therein  stated, 
<and  approved  of  th-e  proceedings  as  recorded. 

And  thereupon  the  accused  proceeds  with  the  examination  of 
Captain  Terrett,  who  proceeds  in  his  answers  to  this  question,  by 
the  accused,  put  to  him  yesterday. 

Ans.  I  know  nothing  of  Captain  Reynolds  being  wounded.  I 
only  heard  that  Captain  Baker  was,  but  never  saw  the  wound. 
Lieutenant  Henderson  was  very  near  me  on  the  San  Cosme  Road, 
and  a  ball  passed  through  his  pantaloons  and  scratched  the  skin, 
thereby  causing  him  to  jerk  his  foot  up.  Twiggs,  of  course,  was 
killed. 

The  accused  offers  the  following  question: 

Have  you  ever  heard  from  any  source  whatever,  previous  to 
the  present  time,  that  Major  Reynolds  was  wounded  at  the  at 
tack  on  Chepultepec;  and  if  so,  from  what  source,  and  when  did 
you  hear  thereof  ? 

Which  question  being  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate  as 
calling  for  hearsay  evidence,  is  excluded  by  the  Court. 

Question  by  the  same. 

In  what  position  was  Captain  Reynolds  and  his  command, 
when  the  Castle  was  taken,  and  by  whom  was  it  taken  ? 

Ans.  I  cannot  state  his  position,  because  I  don't  know  when, 
•or  by  whom,  the  Castle  was  taken. 


34 

Question  by  the  same. 

What  was  the  nature  and  magnitude  of  the  battery  that  held 
the  marines  in  check.  How  many  guns  did  it  mount,  and  their 
size.  Did  the  marines  on  the  right  advance  within  range,  or  did 
they  halt  at  the  place  mentioned,  till  the  battery  was  silenced 
and  the  Castle  captured? 

Ans.  There  were  some  two  or  three  guns,  I  think,  and  within 
range — less  than  two  hundred  yards ;  not  in  direct  range.  My 
impression  is  they  ceased  firing  just  as  we  advanced.  One  of 
these  guns  was  captured  by  Lieutenant  Simms,  Henderson,  and 
myself,  in  pursuit  of  a  large  body  of  the  enemy. 

Question  by  the  same. 

When  did  accused  leave  the  city  of  Mexico,  and  where  has  he 
been  stationed  since? 

Ans.  The  accused,  Lieutenant  Rich,  and  myself,  left  about  the 
20th  March,  1848.  I  can't  say  exactly  where  stationed  since. 

Question  by  the  Court. 

You  say  the  accused  waived  his  sword  and  cheered  the  strag- 
ling  troops.  State  for  the  information  of  the  Court  the  kind  of 
sword  he  waived,  and  at  what  particular  point,  by  reference  to  the 
diagram,  the  cheers  were  given,  as  also  to  what  regiment  the 
straglers  belonged? 

Ans.  The  particular  kind  of  sword  I  can't  say.  The  cheers 
were  given  from  the  time  the  firing  commenced  till  I  lost  sight  of 
him.  There  were  no  other  troops  but  marines,  near  the  place,  and 
there  were  no  troops  in  advance  of  me. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Were  the  marines,  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec,  passed  by 
the  New  York  regiment,  or  any  other  troops,  in  the  direction  of 
the  Castle?  1 

Ans.     They  were  not. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Did  the  battalion  of  marines  direct  its  fire  against  the  Castle, 
or  against  a  body  of  troops  stationed  upon  the  ramparts,  or  on 
either  side  of  the  Castle  ? 

Ans.  Skirmishers  were  sent  out  from  the  Castle.  I  directed 
my  men  to  fire  when  they  could  get  a  good  opportunity,  and  only 
then.  No  fire  was  directed  on  the  Castle  itself  by  me. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Did  you  hear  any  order  given  by  the  accused,  as  aid  of  General 
Shields,  at  the  time  you  state  he  waved  his  sword  ? 

Ans.     Not  as  the  aid  of  General  Shields  ? 

Question  by  the  same. 

Did  the  marines,  at  any  time,  assume  a  position  such  as  would 
warrant  a  party  of  forty  men  to  advance  under  the  protection  of 
their  fire,  for  the  purpose  of  the  operations  of  mining  and  scaling  ? 

Ans.     I  think  not ;  they  were  three  hundred  yards  off,  or  more. 

Question  by  the  same. 

During  your  association  with  the  accused  in  Mexico,  did  he  at 
any  time  show  you  a  sword,  and  state  it  was  presented  to  him  by 
some  citizens  of  Brooklyn. 


35 

Ans.     He  did  not. 

Question  by  the  accused  relative  to  a  question  by  the  Court. 

On  the  field  of  battle  is  it  usual  for  an  aid  to  state  the  capacity 
in  which  an  order  is  given  ? 

Ans.  It  is  usual,  of  course,  for  them  to  say  from  whom  the 
order  comes,  unless  known  to  the  person  ordered  to  be  such  aid. 

Question  by  the  Court. 

Had  you  any  official  information  of  the  appointment  of  the  ac 
cused  as  aid  to  General  Shields? 

Ans.     I  had  none. 

Question  by  the  Court. 

In  what  capacity  was  Captain  Casey  on  the  day  of  the  storm 
ing  of  Chepultepec  ? 

Ans.     Of  my  own  knowledge  I  don't  know. 

Question  by  the  Court. 

Did  Lieutenant  Devlin  disappear  around  the  corner,  as  de 
scribed  by  you,  before  or  after  the  men  were  ordered  to  cover,  and 
did  he  at  any  time  after  they  were  under  cover,  call  to  the 
marines  and  tell  them  to  follow  him  and  he  would  lead  them? 

Ans.  As  I  before  stated,  I  lost  sight  of  him  before  we  halted. 
I  did  not  hear  him  at  any  time  making  such  a  call,  nor  did  I  see 
him  again  after  I  halted  my  men. 

Additional  question  by  accused. 

Did  not  the  accused  pass  the  marines  while  the  men  were  un 
der  cover ;  and  if  yea,  did  not  he,  as  he  so  passed,  wave  his  sword 
.and  cheer  the  men  ? 

Ans.  He  had  passed  them  before  they  were  under  cover,  he 
having  joined  me  immediately  after  we  had  gotten  on  the  Tacu- 
baya  road.  He  joined  me  in  no  capacity.  He  seemed  to  be  ac 
ting  by  himself  alone.  I  lost  sight  of  him  just  as  I  halted  my 
men.  I  did  not  see  him  afterwards,  but  I  did  not  see  him  turn  the 
angle ;  it  was  near  the  angle,  and  I  suppose  he  must  have 
turned  it. 

And  here  the  examination  of  Captain  Terrett  is  closed,  and  his 
testimony,  as  read  to  him,  he  declares  correctly  recorded. 

George  Bender,  a  lawful  witness,  produced  by  the  accused, 
being  duly  sworn,  testifies  as  follows,  to  the  following  interroga 
tories  : 

Were  you  at  the  attack  on  Chepultepec  ;  and  if  so,  in  what  ca 
pacity  ;  in  what  company,  and  under  what  officer,  and  are  you 
acquainted  with  the  accused,  and  how  long  have  you  known  him? 

Ans.  I  then  belonged  to  Captain  Terrett's  company,  a  private. 
Have  known  the  accused  since  21st  April,  1847.  I  was  present 
at  Chepultepec.  I  saw  Lieutenant  Devlin  there  when  he  was 
wounded ;  it  was  on  the  road  from  Tacubaya  to  Chepultepec, 
near  the  bend  of  the  road,  just  beyond  where  Captain  Terrett's 
men  were  stationed. 

Question  by  the  same. 

State  the  position  of  the  marine  officers  and  soldiers  at  the  time 
when  you  saw  Lieutenant  Devlin  wounded.  Were  they  sitting, 
standing,  or  lying  down,  and  under  any  and  what  shelter  ? 


86 

Ans.  Some  standing  up,  some  walking  along  the  ditch,  and 
some  sitting  down,  and  also  several  officers  of  the  army  and  vol 
unteers  were  there  acting  in  the  same  way.  They  came  up  the 
same  road  as  we.  I  did  not  see  them  under  any  shelter;  they 
were  standing  in  the  ditch.  There  was  a  Sort  of  breastwork 
along  the  ditch. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Where  were  Major  Reynolds  and  Colonel  Dulany,  and  in  what 
position  were  they  at,  and  immediately  before  the  time  of  Lieu 
tenant  Devlin  being  wounded  ? 

Ans.  They  were  in  the  ditch  ;  I  can't  say  whether  sitting  or 
standing  ;  there  were  Maguay  bushes  along  the  top  of  the  breast 
work  along  the  ditch. 

Here  the  accused  closed  his  examination,  and  the  Court  put  the 
following  questions : 

Was  your  battalion  exposed  to  the  fire  of  the  enemy  at  the  time 
you  state  you  saw  Lieutenant  Devlin ;  if  so,  was  it  from  artillery 
or  musketry,  or  both  ? 

Ans.     They  were  exposed  to  musketry  and  artillery. 

Question  by  the  same. 

How  far  were  you  from  Lieutenant  Devlin  when  you  saw  him 
wounded? 

Ans.     About  ten  or  twelve  paces. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Was  there  any  water  in  the  ditch  you  mention,  and  how  deep 
was  it  ? 

Ans.  In  some  parts  there  was  water.  It  was,  say,  three  or 
four  feet  deep.  It  was  deeper  on  the  other  side.  Some  parts  of 
the  ditch  was  dry. 

And  here  the  examination  was  closed,  and  the  testimony  hav 
ing  been  read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declares  the  same  correctly 
recorded. 

And  here,  on  application  of  the  accused,  who  states  two  of  his 
witnesses  are  absent,  and  he  cannot,  without  disadvantage,  ex 
amine  Colonel  Dulany  before  those  witnesses,  Arnold  and  Lomas, 
and  prays  the  Court  to  adjourn  to  Monday,  to  enable  him  to  get 
them,  which  the  Court  agreed  to  do,  with  the  declaration  that  if 
the  witnesses  be  not  here  on  Monday,  they  having  been  already 
summoned,  no  further  delay  will  be  allowed. 

It  is  agreed  as  evidence?  that  the  accused  returned  from  Mexico 
in  April,  1848,  and  remained  in  Brooklyn  till  April,  1849,  when  he 
went  to  the  Pacific  on  a  cruise,  remaining  two  years  and  ten 
months,  and  returned  to  Washington,  where  he  remained  two 
months,  and  on  the  29th  March,  1852,  joined  the  Brooklyn  station. 

The  Court  adjourned  till  Monday  morning,  10  o'clock. 


3T 

NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN,  NEW  YORK, 

September  0,  1852,  10  o'clock. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment;  present,  the* Presi 
dent  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court,  the  Judge  Advocate, 
the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  Saturday,  the  4th  September,  are  read  and 
approved. 

And  whereupon  the  accused  produces  Samuel  G.  Arnold,  a 
lawful  witness,  who  being  duly  sworn,  testifies  as  follows  to  the 
following  questions: 

Question  by  the  accused. 

Are  you  editor  of  the  Brooklyn  Daily  Eagle,  and  were  you  so 
on  the  1st  day  of  July,  1852,  and  thence  till  the  present  time? 

Ans.  I  was,  and  am  so  editor. 

Question  by  same. 

Are  you  acquainted  with  John  Lomas,  and  if  yea,  about  how 
long  have  you  known  him,  and  in  what  capacity,  and  are  you 
acquainted  with  his  handwriting  ? 

Ans.  I  am  acquainted  with  him,  and  have  been  probably  three 
or  four  years.  I  know  his  handwriting  so  far  as  to  tell  it  with 
considerable  probability ;  I  think  I  know  it.  I  have  known  him 
chiefly  as  a  writer  for  papers,  sometimes  for  one  and  sometimes 
another. 

The  following  question  having  been  offered  by  the  accused  in 
the  following  words,  viz :  Was  the  paper,  now  produced,  and 
shown  to  you,  and  marked  No.  23,  left  at  your  office  for  publica 
tion  ;  if  yea,  about  what  time  was  it  left,  and  was  it  or  not  pub 
lished,  and  how  long  was  it  at  your  office,  and  whether  any  note 
accompanied  the  same? 

The  same,  with  the  document  therein  referred  to,  is  objected 
to  by  the  Judge  Advocate;  and  the  Court  being  of  the  opinion 
that  the  question  is  improper  and  the  paper  is  not  only  not  evi 
dence  in  this  "Court,  but  impertinent  and  disrespectful  in  its  lan 
guage,  refuse  to  allow  said  question  to  be  put.  The  paper  re 
ferred  to  being  hereunto  annexed,  and  marked  No.  23. 

The  following  question  was  offered  by  the  accused,  viz: 

Was  any  private  note  from  any  person  handed  in  at  your  of 
fice,  accompanying  a  communication  in  relation  to,  or  explana 
tory  to  the  paper  No.  18,  signed  "An  Observer? " 

Which  being  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  was  ordered 
not  to  be  put  by  the  Court. 

Question  by  the  accused. 

Look  at  paper  No.  24,  and  say  in  whose  handwriting  the 
same  is  ? 

Ans.  I  dont  think  I  could  say  in  whose  handwriting  it  is. 

Question  by  same. 

Do  you  recognize  the  person  now  pointed  out  to  you  as  Major 
John  G.  Reynolds,  U.  S.  M.  C.  ? 

Ans.  This  is  the  person  I  have  understood  to  be  Major  Rey 
nolds,  who  called  at  my  office. 


38 

Question  by  same. 

About  what  time  did  he  call  at  your  office,  and  for  what  pur 
pose  did  he  say  he  called? 

Ans.  He  called  to  inquire  in  relation  to  an  article  which  had 
appeared  in  the  Eagle,  under  the  signature  of  "  Observer,"  No. 
18,  perhaps  a  week  after  the  publication  of  it. 

Question  by  the  same. 

When  he  called,  to  whom  did  you  refer  him  for  information  as 
to  said  article  ? 

Ans.  I  dont  remember  the  name  of  the  person  who  left  the 
article,  but  I  referred  him  to  that  person,  who  was  known  to  some 
men  about  the  office. 

Question  by  same. 

Who  is  the  foreman  in  the  office  of  the  Eagle,  and  did  you  or 
not  refer  Major  Reynolds  to  him,  when  he  called  in  relation  to 
the  article? 

Ans.  I  referred  him  to  the  foreman,  to  whom  the  person  was 
known.  The  foreman's  name  was  Patrick  Campbell. 

And  now  the  accused  closed  the  examination  of  the  witness, 
and  the  evidence  having  been  read  over  to  him  he  declares  the 
same  correctly  recorded. 

John  Lomas,  a  witness  produced  by  and  on  behalf  of  the  ac 
cused,  being  duly  sworn  testifies  as  follows,  in  reply  to  the  follow 
ing  interrogatories : 

Question  by  the  accused. 

What  is  your  business  and  employment,  and  how  long  have 
you  been  engaged  in  that  business? 

Ans.  I  am  an  attorney  at  law,  and  a  correspondent  for  the  pub 
lic  press,  and  have  been  for  20  years. 

Question  by  same. 

Are  you  acquainted  with  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  and  how 
long  have  you  known  him  ? 

Ans.  I  have  known  him  ten  or  twelve  years,  intimately. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Look  at  paper  No.  24,  and  say  in  whose  handwriting  it  is? 

Ans.  It  is  in  my  handwriting.  It  is  unlike  my  ordinary  hand 
writing,  but  it  is  in  my  handwriting,  it  was  written  very  hastily. 

The  paper  No.  24,  referred  to  in  the  said  answer,  is  in  the  fol 
lowing  words,  viz : 

Paper  No.  24  is  omitted,  being  the  original  of  paper  No.  18, 
signed  "An .Observer"  in  the  handwriting  of  Mr.  Lomas. 

Question  by  same. 

What  did  you  do  with  paper  No.  24  ? 

Ans.  I  gave  it  to  Mr.  Devlin,  but  when  I  don't  know.  It  was 
after  my  return  from  Washington,  which  was  in  the  latter  part 
of  May  or  first  June,  and  I  went  back  early  in  July. 

Question  by  same. 

At  whose  instigation,  if  any  one's,  did  you  write  said  paper  ? 

Ans.  I  wrote  it  of  my  own  volition,  after  a  conversation  with 
some  gentlemen  in  reference  to  the  Mexican  campaign,  and  I 


39 

will  add  with  a  view  of  placing  Mr.  Devlin  in  a  just  position  be 
fore  the  country,  and  also,  I  had  no  desire  at  the  time  to  reflect 
unfavorably  on  any  particular  individual  connected  with  the-pub- 
lic  service  or  otherwise. 

Question  by  same. 

At  the  time  you  handed  the  paper  No.  24  to  the  accused,  where 
was  he  and  on  what  business  was  he  engaged  ? 

Ans.  If  I  recollect  aright  it  was  in  the  city  of  New  York,  in 
Broadway.  What  he  was  about  I  don't  know,  except  that  he  was 
going  out  of  town  somewhere. 

Question  by  the  accused. 

Was  he  on  public  or  private  business  at  the  time? 

Ans.  I  don't  know  that.    He  was  then  going  to  leave  New  York. 

Question  by  same. 

What  did  you  tell  the  accused,  if  any  thing,  when  you  handed 
the  paper  No.  24  to  him  ? 

Ans.  Our  interview  was  a  brief  one,  I  recollect  saying  to  him, 
that  the  manuscript  was  written  on  both  sides,  and  if  it  was  prin 
ted  it  would  be  necessary  to  have  it  copied,  and  I  explained  to 
him  the  reason  why  the  compositors  required  manuscript  to  be 
written  on  one  side  only,  on  his  asking  the  reason. 

Question  by  the  same. 

What  did  you  understand  at  the  time  from  the  accused  was 
the  purpose  of  his  going  out  of  town  ? 

Ans.  I  don't  recollect  any  conversation  as  to  his  intended  ab 
sence  from  New  York  at  all. 

Question  by  same. 

From  what  source  did  you  get  the  information  on  which  you 
predicated  the  article  ? 

Ans.  I  must  respectfully  decline  answering  that,  for  the  reasons 
that  the  communicMtions  to  me  at  the  time  were  considered  to 
be  strictly  confidential.  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  however, 
that  the  material  allegations  there  were  gotten  from  Lieutenant 
Devlin  himself,  in  conversations  at  different  times  about  his  own 
actions  and  about  the  Mexican  campaign.  Those  conversations 
at  the  time  of  their  occurreuce  however  had  no  reference  to  any 
publication  at  that  time,  and  were  looked  upon  as  simple  narra 
tions  in  which  I  and  others  naturally  felt  an  interest. 

The  accused  offers  the  following  questions : 

Look  at  the  paper  No.  23  now  shown  you  and  say  who  is  the 
author  of  it,  which  question  being  objected  to  by  the  Judge 
Advocate,  was  ruled  out  by  the  Conrt. 

The  accused  thereupon  offers  the  following  paper  to  the  Court 
which  is  in  the  following  words,  viz: 

No.  23. 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Eagle  : 

DEAR  SIR  :  On  the  12th  ultimo  you  were  kind  enough  to  pub 
lish  a  communication  of  mine  under  the  head  of  "  MARINE  SOL- 


40 

DIERS,"  which  I  intended  to  be  complimentary  to  a  gentleman  in 
the  service  of  the  United  States)  as  one  of  the  best  and  bravest 
and  most  efficient  officers)  whom  I  have  for  several  years  known, 
and  for  whom  I  entertain  high  and  unfeigned  regard  and  es 
teem.  That  brief  and  unpretending  letter  had  reference  to  the 
meritorious  services  of  Lieutenant  Devlin,  of  this  city,  during 
the  Mexican  war.  Not  one  iota  of  the  remarks  I  wrote  on  the 
occasion  alluded  to,  not  a  single  syllable  would  I  consent  to  be 
expunged  therefrom,  because  I  have  the  most  conclusive  evidence 
in  my  possession  of  the  entire  truth  of  all  and  every  allegation 
made.  I  learn,  with  equal  surprise  and  regret,  that  the  just 
adulation  I  humbly  sought  to  pay  to  a  chivalrous  and  daring  sol 
dier,  has  excited  the  spleen,  the  env}*,  and  the  jealousy  of  some 
of  his  fellow  officers  to  such  an  extent  that  they  (or  one  of  them 
at  least)  have  determined  to  subject  him  to  the  ordeal  of  a  trial 
by  Court-martial,  in  the  vague  and  false  supposition  that  he  insti 
gated,  or  was  the  author  of  the  publication  which  you  did  me 
the  honor  to  insert  in  the  Eagle. 

It  would,  perhaps,  be  the  best  and  the  severest  rebuke  which 
those  persons  could  suffer,  wrere  they  permitted  to  proceed  with 
their  absurd  and  certainly  suicidal  scheme  ;  because,  in  all  pro 
bability,  they  might  be  subjected  to  a  scrutiny  in  relation  to  their 
own  acts,  during  the  Mexican  campaign,  which  would  render 
them,  in  the  estimation  of  the  community,  and  of  the  world, 
other  than  the  heroes  which  they  have  hitherto  flippantly  and 
fraudulently  claimed  to  be.  Let  the  individuals  referred  to  place 
themselves  in  the  unfortunate  position  if  they  have  the  folly  and 
the  temerity  to  do  so.  1  most  solemnly  aver  that  they  neither 
can  nor  shall  escape  unscathed.  Whilst  with  the  fullest  confi 
dence  I  can  promise  that  the  laurels  so  bravely  won  by  Lieute 
nant  Devlin  shall  no  longer  be  withheld  from  him  to  be  placed 
upon  the  craven  foreheads  of  mere  pretenders. 

OBSERVER. 

BROOKLYN,  August  16,  1852. 


The  accused  now  proposes  to  show  by  the  witness  on  the 
stand,  that  paper  No.  23  was  delivered  at  the  office  of  the  Eagle 
by  him,  together  with  a  private  note  to  the  Editor  requesting  him 
to  publish  the  same,  and  to  prove  that  such  request  for  publica 
tion  of  No.  23  was  made  before  charges  were  preferred  against 
the  accused,  and  before  Major  Reynolds  called  at  the  office  of 
the  Eagle,  which  the  Court  refuses  to  allow  to  be  proved,  as  not 
appearing  to  be  relevant  to  any  issue  in  the  cause. 

And  here  the  accused  closes  the  examination  of  the  witness, 
and  the  Judge  advocate  propounds  the  following  interrogatories  : 

Cross  question  by  Judge  Advocate. 

State  where  you  reside,  and  how  long  you  have  so  resided,  and 
whether  you  have  at  that  place  pursued  your  business  of  attor- 


41 

ney  and  correspondent,  or  writer  of  the  public  press  continuously 
during  that  time? 

Ans.  I  reside  now  in  New  York,  on  Broadway,  and  have  so  re 
sided  since  5th  August,  1852.  Previously  to  that  time  for  13  or 
14  years  I  resided  in  Brooklyn.  My  business  office  is  now  and 
has  been  for  about  three  years,  in  the  office  of  the  Sheriff  of  this 
county.  I  have  been  continuously  occupied  as  above  described 
in  Brooklyn  and  Albany  occasionally,  during  the  legislation,  and 
in  Washington,  when  called  upon,  during  the  above  period.  I 
have  been  engaged  necessarily  in  my  vocation  all  that  time  ex 
cept  when  sick. 

Question  by  the  Court. 

Are  you  a  regular  or  constant  correspondent  of  the  Brooklyn 
Eagle? 

Ans.  I  have  no  connexion  with  the  Brooklyn  Eagle,  nor  have 
ever  had.  Several  years  ago,  I  think,  I  occasionally  reported 
some  local  news  for  the  Eagle. 

And  here  the  examination  of  the  witness  was  closed  by  the 
Judge  Advocate,  and  by  the  Court,  and  the  evidence  having  been 
read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declares  the  same  to  be  corectly 
recorded. 

Lieutenant  Colonel  Dulany,  a  lawful  witness,  called  by  ac 
cused,  being  duly  sworn,  answers  as  follows  to  the  following  in 
terrogatories. 

Q,ustion  by  accused. 

Previously  to  the  present  charges  being  preferred  against  the 
accused,  did  you  have  any  conversation  with  Major  Reynolds  in 
which  he  expressed  any  feeling  relative  to  the  accused  ? 

Ans.  I  had  a  conversation  with  Major  Reynolds  in  conse 
quence  of  an  official  letter  from  him  relative  to  Sergeant  Mc- 
Gann,  in  connexion  with  the  publication  out  of  which  the  charges 
grew,  but  he  then  expressed  no  feelings  either  for  or  against  the 
accused  to  my  recollection. 

Here  the  examination  of  witness  was  closed,  and  the  testi 
mony  having  been  read  over  to  him  he  declares  the  same  cor 
rectly  recorded. 

It  is  agreed  that  Lieutenant  Devlin  left  New  York  for  Norfolk 
in  the  Roanoke  on  the  10th  of  July,  1852. 

The  Court  then  here  recals  Lieutenant  Rich  and  propounds  to 
him  the  following  question  to  which  he  responds  as  follows,  viz  : 

Look  on  the  paper  No.  26  shown  you  yesterday  and  state 
whether  or  not  your  are  the  author  of  it,  and  if  it  be  in  whole  or 
in  part  in  your  handwritting,  or  in  whose  handwriting  is  it  ? 

Ans.  1  am  not  the  author  of  the  letter,  and  although  the  hand 
writing  appears  familiar  to  me,  I  am  not  able  to  say  whose  the 
latter  part  is.  But  I  should  suppose  the  former  part  to  be  in  the 
handwritting  of  Major  Reynolds.  The  latter  part  is  not  in  my 
handwritting.  My  name  appended  to  is  in  my  handwriting. 

Question  by  Court. 

When  you  saw  Lieutenant  Devlin  cheering  and  waving  his 


42 

sword,  were  you  at  the  head  of  your  company,  or  acting  singly 
in  the  charge  at  Chepultepec  ? 

Ans.  At  the  time  specified  a  part  of  my  company  were  with 
me,  and  Captain  Terrett  was  at  the  same  time  near. 

And  here  the  examination  is  closed  and  the  testimony  being 
read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declares  the  same  correctly  recorded. 

The  accused  further  called  Matthew  Riordan  a  lawful  winess, 
who,  being  duly  sworn,  testifies  as  follows  to  the  following  ques 
tions: 

Question  by  the  accused. 

State  whether  you  know  Lieutenant  Devlin,  and  whether  any 
swrord  was  ever  presented  to  him  ;  and  was  the  accused,  at  the 
time  of  such  presentation,  holding  any,  and  what,  municipal 
office  in  Brooklyn  ? 

Ans.  I  know  Lieutenant  Devlin,  £,nd  a  sword  was  presented  to 
him  by  citizens  of  Brooklyn,  when  he  was  an  Alderman  of  the 
Second  Ward,  in  1847  or  1848,  a  short  time  before  he  went  to 
Mexico.  I  have  known  him  for  some  twelve  or  fourteen  years. 

Here  the  examination  of  witness  was  closed,  and  his  testimony 
being  read  over  to  him,  he  declares  the  same  to  be  correctly  re 
corded. 

Lieutenant  B.  E.  Brooke,  a  lawful  witness  produced  by  the  ac 
cused,  being  duly  sworn,  testifies  as  follows  to  the  following 
interrogatories : 

Question  by  accused. 

Do  you  know  the  accused ;  look  at  the  paper  now  shown  to 
you,  No.  25,  and  say  where  and  when  it  was  in  your  possession, 
and  what  you  know  relative  to  the  contents  of  it? 

Ans.  When  I  was  at  Boston  station,  among  Colonel  Watson's 
effects  after  his  decease,  the  paper,  No.  25,  (among  others  relat 
ing  to  the  marine  corps,)  was  handed  to  me  by  Mrs.  Watson. 
She  said  I  could  do  with  it  as  I  pleased.  I  delivered  the  paper  to 
Lieutenant  Devlin,  who  asked  me  to  certify  the  fact  of  my  re 
ceipt  of  the  letter.  I  think  it  to  be  in  Lieutenant  Devlin's  hand 
writing.  The  said  paper,  No.  25,  is  as  follows,  viz : 

No.  25. 

SAN  AUGUSTINE,  MEXICO,  August  19,  1847. 

COLONEL  :  The  regiment  under  your  command  being  about  to 
engage  the  enemy,  and  by  resigning  the  staff  appointment  of 
acting  assisting  quartermaster,  which  I  have  the  pleasure  of 
holding  under  you,  I  will  succeed  to  the  command  of  a  company, 
which  will  be  more  in  consonance  with  my  feelings. 

Therefore,  I  respectfully  tender  to  you  the  resignation  of  my 
staff  appointment. 

I  am,  Colonel,  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

JOHN.  S  DEVLIN, 

Act.  Ass't  Qurtermaster  U.  S.  Marine  Regiment. 
Colonel  S.  E.  WATSON, 

Com'g  Marine  Regiment,  Mexico. 


43 

Here  the  testimony  of  the  witness  being  closed,  and  having 
been  read  over  to  him,  he  declared  the  same  to  be  correctly  re 
corded. 

The  accused  further  offers  the  following  extract  from  the  offi 
cial  report  of  Lieutenant  Colonel  Wm.  Dulany,  relative  to  the 
conduct  of  the  accused  in  Mexico  at  the  storming  of  Chepul- 
tepec,  which  he  is  allowed  to  read  as  evidence  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate,  and  is  in  the  following  words,  viz : 

"On  the  morning  of  the  battle  of  Contreras,  19th  August, 
1847,  when  it  was  hourly  expected  the  marines  would  be  called 
into  action,  Lieutenant  Devlin  tendered  to  Lieutenant  Colonel 
Watson  a  resignation  of  his  staff  appointment,  in  order  to  take 
command  of  a  company  in  the  field,  then  commanded  by  an  offi 
cer  his  junior,  which  was  not  accepted.  Again,  on  the  7th  Sep 
tember,  a  similar  resignation  was  tendered,  and  again  refused  by 
Lieutenant  Colonel  Watson,  on  the  ground  of  not  having  any 
other  officer  so  familiar  with  staff  duties.  From  this  decision  he 
appealed  to  General  Shields,  which  appeal  was  made  in  my  pre 
sence,  and  proved  unsuccessful.  The  General  sustained  the  de 
cision  on  the  ground  of  military  usage,  but  on  my  representing 
to  him  the  anxiety  of  Lieutenant  Devlin  for  active  service,  he 
appointed  him  a  volunteer  aid-de-camp,  in  which  capacity  he 
served  in  the  attack  on  Chepultepec,  where  he  was  for  a  time 
separated  from  the  General.  Subsequently  he  was  engaged  and 
wounded  in  the  attack,  while  advancing  on  the  enemies'  battery. 
After  the  Castle  was  carried  he  proceeded,  though  severely 
wounded,  to  the  Gareta  de  Beleu,  where  he  was  engaged  in  the 
attack  on  that  place,  and  was  among  the  first  to  enter  the  gates 
of  the  enemies'  capitol. 

WM.  DULANY, 
Major  United  States  Marine  Corps. 

And  thereupon  the  accused  proceeds  with  the  cross-examina 
tion  of  Major  Reynolds,  the  witness  produced,  sworn  and  ex 
amined  heretofore  on  the  part  of  the  prosecution. 

Cross-question  by  accused. 

When  were  you  made  a  Brevet  Major  ? 

Ans.  On  the  3d  of  March,  1848,  I  think. 

Question  by  same. 

What  particular  detached  service  was  the  accused  on  with 
you  in  Mexico? 

Ans.  In  the  early  part  of  the  campaign  he  was  Quartermaster 
and  Commissionary — a  short  time  he  acted  as  aid  to  General 
Shields. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Who  was  the  General  who  called  for  the  select  party  of  which 
you  speak  of  in  your  direct  examination,  for  the  storming  of  Che 
pultepec  ? 

Ans.  General  Shields,  after  approbation  of  General  Quitman. 

Cross  question  by  same. 


44 

Were  the  orders  to  you  relative  to  the  storming  of  Chepulte- 
pec  verbal  or  in  writing? 

Ans.  Verbal. 

Question  by  same. 

State  particularly  what  those  orders  were,  and  from  whom 
you  received  them? 

Ans.  The  orders  were  that  I  proceed  on  the  Tacubaya  road,  fur 
nish  my  men  with  the  implements  selected  the  night  before,  and 
after  passing  Drum's  battery  thirty  or  fifty  paces,  to  shelter  my 
self  and  party  in  the  ditch  and  wait  the  passing  of  the  Marines,  and 
to  follow  in  their  rear,  and  when  they  were  in  line  and  com 
menced  firing,  to  advance  under  their  fire.  These  orders  were 
given  by  General  Quitman,  and  repeated  by  General  Shields, 
they  being  together,  and  my  party  forming  in  the  road  at  the 
time. 

This  question  I  was  not  asked  at  the  former  trial  in  Mexico. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

State  the  name  of  the  officer  under  you  in  the  storming  party  ? 

Ans.  Only  Lieutenant  Hare,  of  the  Pennsylvania  volunteers. 
The  name  of  the  marine  soldiers  I  don't  know. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Did  you  observe  the  New  York  regiment  passing  you  when 
under  shelter? 

Ans.  No,  sir ;  I  did  not. 

Here  Pat.'k  Campbell  was  introduced,  and  being  sworn,  duly 
answers  as  follows  t®  the  following  interrogatories : 

Question  by  accused. 

Are  you  foreman  in  the  Eagle  office,  and  do  you  recollect  any 
person  calling  at  the  office  for  the  paper,  No.  18,  and  did  you  de 
liver  it  to  him,  and  did  he  state  who  sent  him  for  it? 

Ans.  I  am  foreman,  I  don't  know  that  any  one  called  for  this 
paper;  as  far  as  my  recollection  serves  me,  this  does  not  appear 
to  be  the  writing. 

Question  by  same. 

Do  you  recognise  any  person  present  as  calling  for  a  commu 
nication  of  the  nature  of  the  paper  No.  18? 

Ans.  Yes,  sir,  (pointing  to  Major  Reynolds,)  that  is  the  gentle 
man.  I  believe  the  publication  was  on  the  13th ;  he  called  about 
two  weeks  after. 

Here  the  examination  v/as  closed,  and  the  testimony  having 
been  read  over  to  the  witness,  he  declares  the  same  correct. 

And  the  Court  then  proceeded  with  the  examination  of  Major 
Reynolds. 

Question  by  accused. 

During  the  period  the  accused  was  with  you  in  Mexico,  did 
you  have  any  quarrel  with  him? 

Ans.  Yes,  sir ;  a  very  severe  one. 

Here  the  Court  adjourned  till  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 


45 
* 

NAVY  YARD, 
10  o'clock  a.  m.,  September  7,  1852. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment.  Present :  the  Presi 
dent,  the  members  of  the  Court,  the  Judge  Advocate,  the  accused 
and  his  counsel* 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  Were  read  and  approved*  The 
accused  thereupon  proceeds  with  the  cross-examination  of  Major. 
J.  G.  Reynolds. 

Cross-question  by  accused. 

Have  you  from  that  time  to  the  present  been  on  unfriendly 
terms  with  Lieutenant  Devlin  ? 

Ans.  Yes,  sir ;  I  have. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

State  the  origin  and  cause  of  such  quarrel  or  difficulty. 

Ans.  It  grew  out  of  improper  language  of  the  accused,  irri" 
properly  influencing  my  son.  The  time  was  the  6th  September, 
1847,  at  San  Augustine,  Mexico* 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Did  you  prefer  charges  against  accused  on  which  he  was  tried 
in  Mexico? 

Ans*  I  did  ;  and  appeared  as  a  witness. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

State  who  were  present  at  the  time  you  heard  Lieutenant 
Devlin  address  his  friends,  as  you  have  above  testified,  in  his 
room  in  Mexico? 

Ans.  Different  officers  at  different  times,  Colonel  Dulany,  Cap 
tain  Terrett,  Lieutenant  Rich,  Lieutenant  Norvell,  Henderson, 
Sims,  and  Nicholson. 

Cross*question  by  same* 

State  the  whole  address  as  you  recollect  it,  and  the  eircum- 
stances  under  which  it  was  made  ? 

Ans.  On  the  first  time  the  accused  was  drunk,  and  harangued, 
when  Colonel  Dulany  and  Captain  Terrett  wrere  present,  as  I  have 
above  repeated,  and  Colonel  Delany  ordered  him  to  keep  silent. 
He  said  he  would  not  be  gagged*  and  continued,  he  said  he 
might  leave  the  room  and  go  to  hell* 

He  said  more  than  I  have  repeated  which  I  can't  now  remem 
ber.  It  continued  a  long  time,  he  evidently  knew  I  was  in  hear 
ing.  This  was  on  the  19th  September. 

After,  on  the  1st  and  5th  October,  he  repeated  what  I  have 
above  stated,  and  Colonel  Dulany  being  present,  did  not  interfere. 
I  heard  Lieutenant  Rich  caution  him.  It  is  impossible  to  state 
the  particulars  further.  There  was  whiskey  in  Lieutenant  Dev 
lin's  room  on  the  occasions.  I  don't  know  whether  there  was 
any  eating  going  on.  I  heard  them  asking  each  other  to  drink. 
On  every  occasion  of  his  addresses  he  was  drunk. 

Accused  offered  the  following  question,  viz  : 

Did  any  person  present  at  the  address  make  any  reply,  and  if 
so,  assenting  or  dissenting  ? 


46 

Which  being  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate  as  irrelevant, 
the  address  being  in  evidence  only  to  show  an  intent  to  make  a 
publication,  relative  to  its  subject  matter,  on  Lieutenant  Devlin's 
return,  and  the  Court  order  it  not  to  be  put. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Did  Lieutenant  Hare  or  any  other  officer  of  the  pioneering 
party  under  you,  decline  to  stay  with  you  under  shelter,  and  ad 
vance  round  the  angle  of  the  road  which  protected  you  ? 

Ans.  After  the  flag  was  down  a  general  rush  was  made.  The 
battalion  was  severed.  Lieutenant  Hare  with  my  party  and  the 
rest  of  the  marines  made  the  rush  round  the  angle  referred  to 
on  the  Castle  gate.  Lieutenant  Hare  did  not  refuse  to  stay. 

Cross-question  by  accused. 

What  troops  carried  the  left  battery,  that  kept  you  in  check, 
and  where  was  the  accused  at  the  time  ? 

Ans.  I  am  not  aware  what  troops  carried  it,  I  only  saw  the 
accused  sitting  behind  a  tree. 
.  Cross-question  by  same. 

Will  you  state  the  nature  of  your  wound,  and  did  you  report 
yourself  to  the  surgeon  or  ever  show  him  your  wound  ? 

Ans.  I  was  wounded  in  the  outside  of  my  left  ankle.  It  was 
slight.  I  showed  it  to  Dr.  McSherry,  who  afterwards  told  me 
Colonel  Dulany  refused  to  notice  my  wound,  unless  he  would  ex 
amine  it.  It  would  only  make  unnecessary  uneasiness  to  my 
family  to  report  it,  so  I  asked  him  not  to  report.  I  saw  Lieuten 
ant  Baker's  wound,  it  was  a  contusion.  He  refused  to  show  it 
because  Colonel  Dulany  had  made  the  demand.  This  I  state  in. 
justice  to  Lieutenant  Baker.  My  wound  was  received  I  suppose 
while  under  cover.  It  was  rather  a  burn  than  a  wound,  and  I 
did  not  notice  it  until  I  was  on  the  road  to  the  Belin  gate. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

State  what  you  mean  when  you  say  "  if  any  marines  followed 
Lieutenant  Devlin  he  must  have  obtained  them  surreptitiously?" 

Ans.  Taking  them  from  the  command  of  other  officers. 

Cross-question. 

Did  or  did  not  you  and  Colonel  Dulany  agree  on  reporting  the 
accused  to  Headquarters,  and  urging  a  prosecution  against  him 
by  Court-Martial ;  and  did  you  or  not  go  to  Washington,  exhibit 
the  paper  No.  18,  obtained  from  Sergant  McGann,  and  urge  Bre 
vet  Brigader  General  Henderson,  and  the  Navy  Department  to 
proceed  to  try  or  prosecute  the  accused  ? 

Ans.  No,  sir.  I  wrote  an  official  note  to  Colonel  Dulany.  I 
also  went  to  Washington  for  the  double  purpose  of  getting  a  fur 
lough  for  my  son,  and  getting  an  investigation  as  to  the  author 
ship  of  the  paper  No.  18.  I  sent  paper  No.  18  to  Headquarters 
in  an  official  letter. 

There  was  no  understanding  bstween  myself  and  Colonel  Du 
lany  about  a  prosecution. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Did  you,  while  in  Mexico,  stride  Lieutenant  Devlin  in  the  face 
with  you  fist  ? 


47 

Ans.  I  did. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Have  you  or  not  on  several  occasions  threatened  to  have  the 
accused  cashiered ;  and  have  you  not  stated  that  you  would  not 
rest  satisfied  until  you  got  him  out  of  the  corps,  or  words  to  that 
effect  ? 

Ans.  Never.     On  the  contrary  I  have  always  acted  on  the  de 
fensive,  defending  my  reputation. 
Cross-question  by  same. 

State  when  and  where  you  first  saw  paper  No.  1 8,  and  had 
you  seen  the  publication  previously  ? 

Ans.  I  saw  the  paper  on  the  1 9th  July,  at  the  office  of  the  Eagle. 
I  heard  of  it  at  my  rendezvous  from  one  of  my  Sergants,  a  day 
or  two  after  the  publication.  I  did  not  see  the  original  paper, 
No.  18,  till  after  my  return  from  Washington,  in  August.  On 
the  19th,  I  asked  for  the  editor.  I  saw  him  and  told  him  that 
the  paper  reflected  on  me  and  others  injuriously — that  I  had,  four 
years  ago,  cautioned  him  about  publishing  articles  reflecting  on 
me.  He  said  he  did  not  observe  the  piece,  or  consider  it  as  re 
flecting  on  any  one,  but  referred  me  to  the  other  editor,  who  re 
ferred  me  to  the  foreman  of  the  office,  who  answered  evasively. 
He  was  ordered  to  speak  out  if  he  knew.  He  said  it  was  an  offi 
cer  of  the  marine  corps.  I  threatened  to  prosecute  the  editor  if 
I  did  not  get  the  author.  He  then  mentioned  McGann  as  having 
brought  it,  and  said  it  had  been  taken  from  the  office  the  day 
previously. 

Cross-question. 

While  at  the  office  was  paper  No.  23  shown  you,  or  did  any 
person  offer  to  show  it  to  you  or  state  its  contents  ? 

Ans.  No  paper  was  shown  me,  nor  was  there  any  offer  to  show 
me  any  paper  or  letter  touching  the  matter.  On  the  contrary,  I 
asked  the  editor  to  publish  a  statement  that  he  did  not  mean  to 
reflect  on  any  officer  by  the  piece  published,  but  he  declined  to 
do  so. 

The  accused  offers  the  following  question  for  the  purpose  of 
contradicting  the  witness,  viz :  On  your  examination  as  a  wit 
ness  on  the  trial  of  the  accused  in  Mexico,  did  you  testify  that 
the  words  used  by  the  accused  were  as  follows,  viz  :  "  Where 
was  Captain  Reynolds  with  his  storming  party  ?  He  was  lying 
back,  he  was  not  doing  his  duty.  I  am  free  to  say  it.  I  will 
make  it  known  on  my  return  to  my  home  in  Brooklyn,  by  pub 
lishing  it  to  the  world  ?" 

And  the  Judge  Advocate  here  hands  to  the  witness  the  record 
of  his  testimony,  procured  and  produced  by  the  accused,  for  the 
purpose  of  contradicting  the  witness,  agreed  to  be  used  as  if  the 
whole  record  were  produced,  to  which  the  accused  objects,  but 
the  Court  allows  the  witness  to  examine  the  record  of  his  testi 
mony  before  replying  to  the  question. 

Ans.  Five  years  or  nearly  so  have  elapsed  since  that  answer 
was  given.  I  have  had  no  minutes  to  keep  the  exact  language 


48 

used  by  the  accused  in  my  mind*  But  I  intended  on  the  testi* 
mony  given  before  the  Court  to  use  the  precise  language.  If  it 
differed,  it  was  intended  to  be  equivalent  of  the  former  language. 
Inasmuch  as  it  is  on  the  record,  I  presume  I  must  have  used  the 
language  imputed  in  the  question. 

Cross-question  by  accused. 

Was  the  language  used  by  the  accused  with  reference  to  you, 
on  the  22d  September,  and  1st  October,  1847,  in  Mexico,  the  same 
on  both  occasions? 

Ans.  They  were  all  of  a  denunciatory  kind,  and  the  language 
was  pretty  generally  of  the  same  character. 

Cross-question  by  same. 

Were  the  same  expressions  used  in  reference  to  the  mode  and 
manner  in  which  he  would  publish  you  on  his  return  ? 

Ans.  I  believe  he  made  use  of  pretty  much  the  same  words* 
They  were  tending  to  the  same  point,  and  in  substance  the  same* 

Question  by  same. 

Upon  both  occasions,  did  he  make  use  of  the  words  "  publish 
to  the  world  and  make  it  known  through  the  public  newspapers?'* 

Ans.  I  think  he  did  on  both  occasions.  I  am  certain  he  did  on 
the  last  occasion. 

Cross  question  by  Same. 

Did  you  in  Mexico  testify  to  any  conversation  on  the  5th  of 
October? 

Ans>  I  don't  remember  testifying  to  any  conversation  in  Mexico 
on  the  5th  October.  But  I  do  so  now? 

Question  by  same. 

Did  Lieutenant  Devlin  demand  satisfaction  of  you  for  the 
blow  you  gave  him  in  Mexico  ? 

Ans.  He  did  next  morning. 

And  the  examination  being  closed  and  read  over  to  the  witness, 
he  desires  to  make  the  following  corrections: 

That  on  reflection,  and  from  examining  the  record  of  the  testi 
mony  in  Mexico,  he  is  incorrect  in  saying  that  the  language, 
used  on  the  5th  October,  and  1st  October,  was  the  same.  He 
should  have  said  the  language  on  the  22d  September,  and  1st 
October,  was  the  same ;  and  from  not  having  shown  the  paper 
No.  18,  he  supposed  it  to  be  the  printed  article,  and  not  the  ori 
ginal  manuscript  from  which  the  publication  was  made.  And 
he  now  states  that  it  was  the  printed  article  he  sent  to  Washing* 
ton,  and  he  never  saw  the  original  manuscript  till  the  meeting  of 
this  Court.  And  the  testimony  so  corrected  he  declares  correctly 
recorded. 

The  accused  gave  in  evidence  the  following  agreement,  with 
the  accompanying  papers,  viz  : 

"It  is  further  agreed  that  the  accused  may  read  in  evidence 
the  following  extracts  from  the  reports  of  General  Pillow,  Gen 
eral  Quitman,  General  Shields,  and  General  Persifer  F.  Smith,  as 
published  by  Congress,  Executive  Doc.,  No*  1,  1847." 


49 

Extract  from  General  Pillow's  report : 

"  The  advance  of  General  Quitman's  division,  which  was  to 
have  assaulted  upon  the  left  of  the  division,  having  fallen  under 
the  fire  of  a  battery  on  the  outside  of  the  outer  walls,  and  being 
unable  to  scale  it  in  consequence  of  the  want  of  ladders,  were  ^ 
obliged  to  march  several  hundred  yards  to  the  south,  and  to  enter  > 
the  very  breach  through  which  portions  of  my  command  had  J 
passed  at  the  commencement  of  the  action." 

Extract  from  General  Q,uitman's  report : 

"The  battalion  of  marines  being  posted  to  support  the  storm 
ing  parties,  I  ordered  the  assault  at  all  points.     The  storming       J 
parties,  led  by  the  gallant  officers  who  had  volunteered  for  this     ^ 
desperate  service,  rushed  forward  like  a  resistless  tide.      The     J 
Mexicans,  behind  their  batteries  and   breastworks,  stood  with 
more  than  usual  firmness.     For  a  short  time  the  contest  was     ^ 
hand  to  hand,  swords  and  bayonets  were  crossed,  and  rifles  club-      -^ 
bed.     Resistance  was,  however,  vain  against  the  desperate  valor      j 
of  our  brave  troops.     The  batteries  and  strong  works  were  car 
ried,  and  the  ascent  of  Chepultepec  on  that  side  laid  open  to  an 
easy  conquest.     In  these  works  were  taken  seven  pieces  of  ar 
tillery,  one  thousand  muskets,  and  five  hundred  and  fifty  prisoners,      <Z 
of  whom  one  hundred  were  officers,  among  them  one  General     / 
and  ten  Colonels. 

"The  gallant  Captain  Casey  having  been  disabled  by  a  severe 
wound  directly  before  the  batteries,  the  command  of  the  storming 
party,  of  regulars  in  the  assault,  devolved  on  Captain  Paul,  of 
the  7th  infantry,  who  distinguished  himself  for  his  bravery. 

"  Lieutenant  Fred.  Steele,  2d  infantry,  with  a  portion  of  the 
storming  party,  advanced  in  front  of  the  batteries  towards  the 
left,  there  scaled  the  outer  walls  through  a  breach  near  the  top, 
made  by  a  cannon  shot,  ascended  the  hill  directly  in  his  front, 
and  was  among  the  first  upon  the  battlements.  The  young  arid 
promising  Lieutenant  Levi  Gaunt,  7th  infantry,  was  of  this  party. 
He  had  actively  participated  jn  almost  every  battle  since  the 
opening  of  the  war,  but  was  destined  here  to  find  a  'soldier's 
grave.' 

"  The  column  was  re-organized  for  an  attack  upon  the  batteries 
of  the  garita  of  the  city,  the  regiment  of  riflemen,  intermingled 
with  the  bayonets  of  the  South  Carolina  regiment,  were  placed 
in  advance— three  rifles  and  three  bayonets  under  each  arch." 

Extract  from  General  Shield's  report : 

"The  other  officers  and  soldiers  of  the  whole  command  be 
haved  with  equal  gallantry  and  good  conduct,  Lieutenant  Colonel 
Baxter,  commanding  the  New  Yorkers,  fell  mortally  wounded  in 
this  gallant  charge. 

"  The  enemy  made  another  determined  stand  at  a  position  on 
the  road,  above  a  mile  from  Chepultepec,  behind  a  strong  breast 
work  across  the  road,  flanked  on  his  right  by  a  field  redan,  and 
4 


50 

protected  upon  the  left  by  an  impassable  marsh.  This  position, 
however,  was  soon  rapidly  carried  by  the  rifles  and  palmettoes, 
aided  by  a  well  directed  fire  from  Drum's  battery." 

Extract  from  General  Smith's  report : 

"I  reported  to  General  Quitman  at  Tacubaya  on  the  morning 
of  the  13th  September,  and  was  ordered  by  him  to  form  the  re 
serve  of  his  column,  in  the  attack  on  the  east  side  of  Chepul- 
tepec. 

"  My  brigade  consisted  of  the  regiment  of  mounted  riflemen, 
1st  artillery,  and  3d  infantry.  Two  companies  of  riflemen  and 
two  of  the  3d  infantry  were  absent  on  detached  service.  The 
main  body  of  General  Q,uitman's  command  was  advanced  by  the 
road  leading  from  the  east  end  of  Tacubaya,  towards  the  foot  of 
the  hill  at  Chepultepec.  In  pursuance  of  the  General's  direc 
tions,  I  formed  my  brigade  in  his  rear,  and  prolonging  my  right 
beyond  his  to  cover  his  right  and  rear  from  the  enemy  stationed 
near  the  aqueduct  leading  from  Chepultepec  to  the  city,  and  I 
detached  two  companies  of  riflemen  under  Captain  Simonson,  and 
afterwards,  a  third,  under  Lieutenant  Morris,  still  further  to  my 
right  and  rear,  the  better  to  secure  the  whole.  The  enemy's  prin 
cipal  batteries  on  this  side  were  discovered  to  be  at  the  foot  of 
the  hill,  near  where  the  acqueduct  leaves  it,  so  that  prolonging 
my  line  in  that  direction  brought  the  regiment  of  mounted  rifle 
men  on  my  right,  immediately  in  rear  of  the  storming  parties 
under  Captain  Paul,  7th  infantry,  and  when  the  attack  was  or 
dered,  they  (the  riflemen)  entered  the  battery  along  with  the 
storming  party,  and  carried  the  second  battery  in  rear  of  the  first, 
where  several  guns  and  many  prisoners  were  taken." 

And  thereupon  Lieutenant  Rich  offers  to  the  Court  the  follow 
ing  explanation  of  his  testimony,  which  is  read  by  consent  as 
follows,  viz :  Lieutenant  Rich  begs  leave  to  state  that  he  has 
seen  the  original  of  paper  No.  26,  which  he  yesterday  testified, 
he  was  not  the  author  of.  He  finds  it  in  his  handwriting,  although 
he  had  not  then  nor  has  he  now  any  remembrance  of  writing  the 
same. 

J.  RICH,  Lieut.  U.  S.  M.  C. 

And  the  Court  then  adjourns  till  tomorrow  morning  at  10 
o'clock. 


NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN, 
September  8,  1852,  10  o'clock,  a.  m. 
The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court, 
the  Judge  Advocate,  the  accused  and  his  counsel. 
The  proceeding  of  yesterday  are  read  and  approved. 
And  thereupon  it  appearing  to  the  Court  that  John  Roach,  a 
witness  summoned  for  the  accused,  is  sick  and  cannot  attend,  and 


51 

the  accused  swearing  that  he  expects  him  to  prove  the  facts  fol 
lowing,  (if  here,)  the  Judge  Advocate  agrees  to  admit  said  state 
ment  as  if  testified  to  by  said  witness,  which  statement  is  as  fol 
lows,  viz :  The  accused  states  that  he  confidently  expects  to 
prove  by  John  Roach,  a  resident  of  the  city  of  Washington,  the 
following  facts:  First,  that  said  John  Roach  was  a  sergeant  at 
tached  to  the  company  of  marines  commanded  by  Lieutenant 
Young  at  the  advance  of  the  troops  at  the  storming  and  assault 
of  Chepultepec,  and  when  the  marines  halted,  the  accused  called 
to  them  to  follow  him,  on  which  the  said  Sergeant  John  Roach 
and  a  few  others  did  spring  up  and  follow  the  accused,  until  said 
Roach  received  a  severe  wound  in  the  thigh,  which  caused  him 
to  remain  behind,  and  the  accused  with  the  others  advanced  on 
ward  towards  the  enemies'  batteries. 

Second,  that  John  Roach  as  he  ran  out  saw  Captain,  now  Bre 
vet  Major,  Reynolds  sitting  or  lying  down  under  cover  of  the 
embankment  and  Maguay  bushes. 

Third,  that  he  can  state  the  particular  place  and  situation  in 
which  Captain  Reynolds  was  during  the  storming  of  Chepultepec, 
and  during  the  fire  of  the  musketry,  (the  marines  being  under 
cover,)  that  Captain  Reynolds  remained  quiet,  permitting  a  part 
of  his  men  to  retire  to  the  rear. 

Fourth,  that  witness,  since  the  occasion  above  referred  to, 
heard  Captain  Reynolds  make  various  threats  against  the  accused, 
and,  among  others,  that  he  never  would  be  satisfied  until  he  suc 
ceeded  in  getting  accused  out  of  the  corps,  or  words  to  that  effect, 
or  of  similar  import. 

Fifth,  that  Captain  Reynolds  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out 
his  threats  against  the  accused,  made  inquiries  of  the  witness, 
and  in  his  witnesses  presence,  of  several  other  persons  and  ma 
rines,  for  the  purpose  of  finding  out  some  charge  against  the  ac 
cused. 

Sixth,  that  he  saw  Captain  Reynolds  in  Washington  some 
time  in  July  or  first  of  August  last,  and  that  he  stated  that  he 
went  on  to  Washington  to  have  accused  tried  or  broke,  or  words 
to  that  effect,  or  of  similar  import. 

JOHN  S.  DEVLIN. 

Sworn  in  open  Court. 

H.  W.  DAVIS,  Judge  Advocate. 

And  there  the  accused  closes  his  case. 

And  the  accused  having  closed  his  case,  the  Judge  Advocate 
proceeds  to  offer  the  following  rebutting  evidence : 

Aug.  S.  Nicholson,  a  lawful  witness,  produced  and  sworn  by 
the  Judge  Advocate,  answers  as  follows,  to  the  following  inter 
rogatories  : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

Say  if  you  know  John  Roach,  Sergeant  in  Lieutenant  Young's 
company  of  marines  in  Mexico,  and  where  you  saw  him  on  the 
day  of  the  storming  of  Chepultepec,  and  at  what  point  of  time. 


52 

and  place  was  he  wounded,  and  was  the  accused  near  him,  or 
how  far  from  him  at  that  time  ? 

Ans.  I  did ;  he  was  orderly  sergeant  of  the  company  to  which 
I  was  attached.  I  saw  him  at  the  storming  of  Chepultepec,  with 
his  company,  which  was  somewhere  about  the  centre  of  the  line. 
He  was  wounded  while  advancing  on  the  Tacubaya  road,  some 
two  or  three  hundred  yards  from  the  corner  of  the  road  above  re 
ferred  to  and  stated,  before  the  marines  had  taken  cover.  I  saw 
him  fall  out  of  the  ranks,  with  the  exclamation  that  he  was 
wounded,  and  did  not  again  see  him  till  I  saw  him  in  the  city  of 
Mexico.  At  that  particular  time  I  don't  remember  seeing  Lieu 
tenant  Devlin  at  all.  Some  few  moments,  or  a  short  time  before, 
I  saw  him  at  or  near  the  head  of  the  line. 

Question  by  the  same. 

Did  said  John  Roach  or  any  other  marines,  spring  up  from  their 
cover  and  follow  Lieutenant  Devlin,  on  his  call,  after  the  marines 
had  taken  shelter? 

Ans.  I  did  not  see  Lieutenant  Devlin  at  all  after  we  took  shel 
ter,  till  on  the  road  to  the  Garita  de  Belen. 

Question  by  the  same. 

How  far  was  Roach  from  you  when  wounded? 

Ans.  The  company  was  a  small  one.  He  was  twenty  or  thirty 
paces  before  me. 

Here  the  Judge  Advocate  closes  his  examination,  and  the  ac 
cused  propounds  the  following  cross-interrogatories: 

Question  by  the  accused. 

Were  you  separated  from  your  company  at  the  time  referred 
to  in  your  answer  above,  and  if  so,  how  long  were  you  separated  ? 

Ans.  No.  1  was  with  my  company  at  that  time  and  place. 
The  company  was  not  separated  before  they  took  shelter.  When 
the  flag  was  taken  down  from  the  Castle  of  Chepultepec,  there 
was  a  general  rush,  and  the  companies  were  all  broken  and  min 
gled  up ;  they  again  were  separated  and  arranged  in  the  yard  of 
the  Castle,  excepting  those  who  kept  on  with  Captain  Terrett  on 
the  San  Cosme  road.  .  At  the  time  of  the  rush  1  was  separated 
from  my  Captain,  and  did  not  see  him  again  for  three  days,  I 
think. 

Cross-questioned  by  the  same. 

Did  not  your  company  and  the  marines  halt  under  cover  of  a 
dilapidated  adobe  house,  before  you  halted  in  the  Maguay  ditch, 
and  might  not  Sergeant  Roach  have  left  that  cover  without  your 
notice  ? 

Ans.  We  did  halt  at  the  rancho.  He  might,  by  possibility, 
have  left  the  cover  there,  but  I  don't  think  he  did.  He  did  not, 
however,  leave  his  company  there,  for  it  was  just  after  the  ma 
rines  left  that  place,  that  he  was  wounded  with  his  company. 

And  here  the  testimony  is  closed,  and  the  same  having  been 
read  over,  the  witness  declares  the  same  correct. 

The  accused,  by  leave  of  the  Court,  propounds  the  following 
question  to  Captain  Terrett : 


53 

Question  by  the  accused. 

While  the  marines  made  their  first  halt  under  cover  of  the 
adobe  house,  did  you  or  not,  see  the  accused  rushing  forward,  and 
do  you  or  not  know  that  Sergeant  Roach  and  others,  advanced  at 
that  time  with  the  accused? 

Ans.  I  saw  the  accused  about  that  time,  but  have  no  recollec 
tion  of  seeing  him  moving.  I  do  not  know  that  Sergeant  Roach 
or  any  other  men,  advanced  with  the  accused.  He  had  no 
men  under  his  command;  the  halt  at  the  rancho  was  very  short. 

The  evidence  being  read  over  to  the  witness,  is  declared  to  be 
correct. 

And  here  the  Judge  Advocate  closes  his  testimony,  and  the  ac 
cused  closes  his  testimony.  And  thereupon  the  Court  proceeds  to 
consider  the  said  case. 

And  the  Judge  Advocate  submits  the  case  to  the  Court,  with 
the  following  observations,  which  are  read  to  the  Court  in  the 
following  words  :  (The  remarks  of  the  Judge  Advocate  not  being 
properly  part  of  the  record,  are  omitted.) 

And  thereupon  the  accused  offers  the  following  request  to  the 
Court : 

The  accused  now  asks  until  next  Monday  to  arrange  and  pre 
pare  his  defence,  and  states  that  the  preparation  of  such  defence 
will  require  at  least  that  time,  as  it  will  occupy  a  day  or  two  to 
arrange  the  testimony  preparatory  to  writing  out  the  defence. 

And  thereupon  the  Court  order  that  the  time  required  be  al 
lowed. 

And  thereupon  Lieutenant  Augustus  Nicholson  prays  to  be  ex 
cused  from  passing  sentence  on  the  accused,  since  he  was  objected 
to  by  the  accused,  who,  though  he  withdrew  such  objection,  may 
still  entertain  some  want  of  confidence  in  him. 

And  thereupon  the  Court  is  cleared  for  consultation,  and  hav 
ing  consulted  in  the  absence  of  said  Lieutenant  Nicholson,  the 
Court  is  opened,  and  the  Court  announces  its  decision,  as  follows  : 

It  is  the  opinion  of  the  Court  that  Lieutenant  Nicholson  be  not 
excused. 

And  thereupon  the  Court  adjourns  till  to-morrow  morning  at 
10  o'clock. 


NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN, 
September  9,  1852,  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court, 
and  the  Judge  Advocate. 

The  proceedings  of  the  Court  of  yesterday  were  read  and  ap 
proved. 

And  thereupon  the  Court  adjourns  till  to-morrow  morning  at 
10  o'clock. 


54 

NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN, 
September  10,  1852,  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  and  the  members  of  the 
Court. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  are  read  and  approved, 

And  the  Court  adjourns  till  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 

NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN, 
September  11,  1852,  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  and  the  members  of  the 
Court. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  are  read  and  approved. 
The  Court  adjourns  till  to-morrow  morning  at  10  o'clock. 


NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN, 

September  13,  1852. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court, 
and  the  accused. 

The  proceedings  of  the  Court  on  the  llth  September  were  read 
and  approved. 

The  President  of  the  Court  announced  to  the  accused  that  he- 
would  be  called  upon  for  his  defence  on  Wednesday  morning  at 
10  o'clock. 

Thereupon  the  Court  adjourned  till  to-morrow  morning  at 
10  o'clock. 


NAVY  YARD,  BROOKLYN, 
September  14,  1852,  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  and  the  members  of  the 
Court. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  were  read  and  approved. 
Thereupon  the  Court  adjourned  till  morrow  morning,  10  o'clock. 

NAVY  YARD,  BROOLLYN, 
September  15,  1852,  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

The  Court  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Present,  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  members  of  the  Court, 
the  Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

And  thereupon  the  Court  asks  the  said  accused,  Lieutenant 
John  S.  Devlin,  if  he  be  ready  to  proceed  with  his  defence. 

And  the  said  Lieutenant  J.  S.  Devlin,  declares  he  is  ready,  and 
offers  his  defence  to  the  Court,  which  is  read  in  the  following 
words,  that  is  to  say :  (See  defence  appended.) 


55 

The  Judge  Advocate  submits  in  reply  a  few  remarks,  (which 
are  omitted  as  not  properly  being  part  of  the  record.) 

And,  thereupon,  the  Judge  Advocate  closes  the  case,  and  sub 
mits  the  same  to  the  court. 

And,  thereupon,  the  Court  being  closed,  the  proceedings  are 
read  over  by  the  Judge  Advocate  which  having  been  heard  and 
considered,  the  Court  does  find  as  follows : 

The  Court  ffnd  the  first  specification  of  the  first  charge  proven, 
except  the  following  words,  viz :  "The  President  of  the  United 
States,  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  at  the  date  of  the  publication 
thereof,"  which  words  the  court  find  not  proved. 

And  the  Court  find  the  accused  guilty  of  the  first  charge. 
And  the  Court  find  the  first  specification  of  the  second  charge 
proven.     And  they  find  the  second  specification  of  the  second 
charge  proven. 

And  the  Court  find  the  accused  guilty  of  the  second  charge. 
And  the  Court  find  the  first  specification  of  the  third  charge 
proven,  except  the  words  following,  that  is  to  say;  "Copy  or 
cause  to  be  copied  the  said  written  communication,  and  that  the 
copy  so  made,"  and  the  iollowing  words:  "did  so  copy  or  cause 
to  be  copied,"  and  the  words :  "  to  copy  and,"  which  words  they 
find  not  proven. 

And  the  Court  find  the  accused  guilty  of  the  third  charge* — 
proven,  except  so  much  thereof  as  states  the  request  of  the  ac 
cused  to  Sergeant  McGann  to  copy  said  article  in  the  specifica 
tion  mentioned. 

And  the  Court  find  the  accused  guilty  of  the  fourth  charge. 
And,  thereupon,  the  Court  considering  the  said  charges  and 
specifications  and  the  evidence  touching  the  same,  and  having 
fully  and  maturely  deliberated  on  the  same,  does  pronounce  the 
following  sentence — 

The  Court  does  sentence  the  accused,  1st  Lieutenant  John  S. 
Devlin,  to  be  cashiered  the  service. 

And,  thereupon,  the  Court  having  closed  all  business  legally 
before  them,  adjourns  sine  die. 

Capt.  A.  N.  BROVOR 
"      H.  B.  TYLER, 
"     J.  L.  C.  HARDY, 
"     G.  H.  TERRETT, 
"      A.  H.  GILLESPIE, 
Lieut.  B.  E.  BROOKE, 

W.  A.  T.  MADDOX, 
"       J.  C.  GRAYSON, 
"       A.  S.  NICHOLSON. 

HENRY  WINTER  DAVIS,  Judge  Advocate. 

The  foregoing  sentence  is  hereby  approved  this  18th  Septem 
ber,  1852. 

MILLARD  FILLMORE. 


ft     P     E     N     G     E  . 


UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA  vs.  JOHN  S.  DEVLIN. 

The  accused,  reserving  to  himself  the  benefit  of  the  several 
objections  to  the  Court,  made  by  him  previous  to  and  after  the 
organization  of  the  Court,  and  to  the  several  objections  made 
and  insisted  upon  by  him  during  the  course  of  the  trial,  makes 
the  following  defence  to  the  charges  and  specifications  against 
him.  To  the  first  charge:  "Treating  with  contempt  his  supe 
rior  officers."  The  word  "contempt,"  as  defined  by  lexicogra 
phers,  means  the  act  of  despising,  the  act  of  viewing  or  con 
sidering,  and  treating  as  mean,  vile,  and  worthless;  disdained; 
and  is  considered  one  of  the  strongest  expressions  of  a  mean 
opinion.  For  the  purpose  of  sustaining  the  specification  under 
this  charge,  the  prosecution  have  introduced  the  following  testi 
mony:  The  admissions  of  the  accused  that  paper  No.  18,  and 
letter  No.  19,  are  in  his  handwriting,  and  also  the  testimony  of 
Sergeant  McGann  to  the  fact  of  the  paper  No.  18  being  in  the 
handwriting  of  the  accused  as  evidence,  per  se,  that  the  accused 
wrote  and  prepared  it  for  publication.  The  declaration  made  by 
the  accused  at  the  time  he  handed  the  paper  to  Sergeant  Mc 
Gann,  (see  his  testimony,)  that  it  had  been  put  into  his  hand  by 
some  person  with  that  party's  request,  that  it  be  published  in  the 
Daily  Eagle,  is  affirmative  testimony,  offered  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecution,  and  cannot  therefore  be  impeached  ;  the  whole  tes 
timony  must  be  taken  together ;  the  party  offering  the  testimony 
cannot  impeach  his  own  witness,  and  has  no  right  to  travel  out 
of  the  record  (the  evidence)  to  explain  or  vary  that  testimony. 
If  then  it  was  handed  to  him,  he  did  not  write  it,  (that  is,  he 
was  not  the  author,)  in  the  sense  used  in  this  specification.  Nor 
did  he  prepare  it  for  publication,  nor  did  he  publish  or  cause  it 
to  be  published — the  mere  expression  used  in  Sergeant  McGann's 
testimony.  Lieutenant  Devlin  "  asked  me  if  I  knew  any  person, 
or  if  I  wou'd  attend  to  it,"  made  use  of  under  the  circumstances 
and  upon  the  occasion,  (in  a  hurry,)  taken  in  connexion  with  the 
fact  that  it  was  originally  handed  to  the  accused,  is  not,  nor 
ought  it  to  be,  in  a  criminal  case,  where  the  law  is  imperative 
upon  the  Court,  to  give  the  accused  the  benefit  of  every  reasona 
ble  doubt,  evidence  of  a  request  or  direction  from  the  accused  to 
publish  it.  It  was  handed  to  Sergeant  McGann  to  dispose  of  it 
as  he  chose,  he  had  the  option  to  publish  it  or  destroy  it.  And 
if  he,  McGann,  did  publish  it,  the  accused  is  at  a  loss  to  imagine 
upon  what  principle  he  is  to  be  held  accountable  for  the  acts  of 
McGann ;  and  the  letter  of  the  accused,  No.  19,  cannot  be  re 
sorted  to  for  the  purpose  of  explaining  or  giving  larger  scope  to 


58 

the  testimony  of  McGann,  he  intrusted  to  McGann's  "  care  and 
prudence" — that  is,  le^j^^t^ntirglyj-iscretionary  with  Mc 
Gann  to  publish  the  paperor  not;  the  letter,  No.  19,  says,  "you 
might  in  fact  do  with  it  as  you  pleased."  McGann  never  read 
the  paper  over  until  next  day,  when  he  copied  it,  and  the  follow 
ing  day  (Monday)  it  was  left  by  McGann  at  the  office  of  the 
Eagle.  McGann's  copy  has  never  been  produced,  and  the  man 
ner  in  which  it  was  written,  whether  on  one  side  or  both,  does 
not  appear.  The  learned  Judge  Advocate  seemed  to  put  great 
stress  on  the  fact  that  the  paper,  No.  18,  was  written  on  both 
sides;  take  that  fact  in  connexion  with  the  fact  that  it  was  to 
be  published,  (see  Lomas's  testimony,)  it  was  to  be  written  only 
on  one  side,  and  it  must  furnish  an  irresistable  argument  in  favor 
of  the  accused — that  he  did  not  intend  to  copy  No.  18  (I  mean 
that  particular  copy)  to  be  published.  I  admit  that  the  copying 
of  a  libel  is  a  publication,  but  that  is  not  within  the  specification  ; 
he  must  have  *'  published,  or  caused  to  be  published,  in  the  Brook 
lyn  Eagle,"  to  come  within  the  specification.  That  the  accused 
copied  the  paper,  No.  18,  from  the  original  manuscript,  (and 
without  any  malicious  intent,  for  in  the  absence  of  proof,  malice 
in  the  present  case  cannot  be  inferred,)  is  a  fact  that  cannot  be 
disputed.  How  the  mere  copying  of  a  paper,  and  delivering 
such  copy  to  Sergeant  McGann,  under  the  circumstances,  can 
be  construed  into  a  contempt  of  his  "superior  officers,"  the  ac 
cused  is  lost  in  conjecture.  There  was  certainly  an  absence  of 
motive  from  the  testimony  in  the  case,  as  no  unfriendly  feelings 
are  proved  to  exist  between  the  accused  and  any  of  his  "  supe 
rior  officers,"  with  the  single  exception  of  Brevet  Major  Reynolds. 

It  would  be  doing  violence  to  the  construction  of  the  English 
language  to  make  this  specification  apply  to  General  Henderson, 
(the  prosecution  having  abandoned  the  specification  as  applica 
ble  to  the  President  of  the  United  States  and  the  Secretary  of 
the  Navy,)  and  it  cannot  in  this  specification  be  applicable  to 
any  other  officer — the  rule  being  that  the  particular  persons  must 
be  named  in  the  specification,  and  the  particular  manner  in 
which  the  party  is  or  may  be  affected  must  be  pointed  out  with 
reasonable  certainty. 

Charge  2d.  Using  provoking  and  reproachful  words  respecting 
other  persons  of  the  Marine  Corps. 

The  first  specification  charges  that  they  are  "  provoking  and 
reproachful"  towards  General  Henderson,  Major  Howie,  and 
Major  Nicholson. 

It  is  a  very  difficult  matter,  the  accused  submits,  under  this 
charge,  if  he  were  entirely  innocent,  to  disprove  the  same.  What 
the  officers  named  in  the  specificaiion  personally  might  consider 
provoking  and  reproachful,  is  a  question  exclusively  for  them  to 
decide.  But  when  the  subject  is  brought  before  a  Court-Martial 
composed  of  honorable  and  chivalric  men,  such  as  the  present 
Court  is  composed  of,  a  common  sense  construction  will  be  given 
by  the  Court  to  the  effect  of  the  words. 


59 

vlt  is  difficult  to  say  how  words  in  an  anonymous  communica 
tion,  emanating  from  an  obscure  pres^,  under  the  signature  of 
"An  Observer,"  could,  under  any  circumstances,  provoke  men 
who  are  at  the  head  of  an  honorable  and  brave  corps.  To  make 
the  words  reproachful  and  provoking  towards  the  gentlemen 
named,  it  must  first  be  conceded  that  those  persons  named  in  the 
specification,  are  "The  Stay-at-home  Drones  of  Headquarters,"  a 
concession  which  the  accused  will  not  permit  or  suffer  to  be  per 
mitted  as  emanating  from  him.  The  accused  most  solemnly  pro 
tests  and  insists  that  his  intercourse  with  the  gentlemen  referred 
to,  precludes  the  possibility  of  any  such  intention  on  his  part. 
The  accused  deeply  regrets  that  in  his  answer  to  the  2d  specifi 
cation  under  charge  2d,  he  deems  it  due  to  the  Marine  Corps,  to 
which  he  has  been  attached  more  than  twenty-eight  years,  and 
also  necessary  to  his  defence,  that  he  should  here  examine  some 
what  in  detail  the  testimony  taken.  The  accused  equally  regrets 
that  the  decision  of  the  Court,  admitting  declarations  made  by 
him  in  Mexico,  about  five  years  since,  compelled  him  to  exam 
ine  this  testimony  in  detail,  which  he  otherwise  would  have  re 
frained  from  and  left  unnoticed,  on  this  record.  Brevet  Major 
John  G.  Reynolds,  whose  hostility  to  the  accused  for  about  five 
years,  (see  his  testimony,)  having  heard  of  the  article  having  been 
published,  hastened  to  the  Eagle  Office  and  obtained  all  the  in 
formation  he  could  ;  not  for  the  purpose,  as  the  accused  insists  and 
the  testimony  shows,  of  vindicating  his  character  as  an  officer, 
but  to  gratify  his  malevolent  feelings  towards  the  accused.  What 
officer,  the  accused  ventures  to  ask,  would  go  from  the  city  of  New 
York  to  Washington,  for  the  "  double  purpose  "  of  prosecuting  the 
accused  and  getting  a  furlough  for  his  son  ?  The  accused  sub 
mits  that  it  is  not  usual  for  persons  to  visit  Washington  for  the 
purpose  of  procuring  a  furlough  ;  and  he  submits  from  the  facts 
and  testimony  in  this  cause,  that  he  has  a  right,  and  this  Court 
ought  to  infer,  that  the  visit  of  Major  Reynolds  to  Washington 
would  not  have  taken  place  at  that  time  had  the  communication 
not  been  published,  and  that  his  principal  object  in  going  there 
was  to  insist,  in  person,  to  have  the  accused  brought  to  a  Court- 
Martial.  And  the  accused  insists  that  the  controversy  is  more  of 
a  private  than  of  a  public  nature.  The  accused  insists  that  the 
language  of  the  communication  is,  in  substance,  proved  by  the 
testimony  not  only  of  Major  Reynolds,  but  also  by  all  the  testi 
mony  in  the  case. 

And  that  the  language  was  not  used  for  the  purpose  of  affect 
ing  the  character  of  any  person.  That  Major  Reynolds  and  others 
sat  on  the  ground  under  cover  of  an  embankment  topped  with 
Maguay  bushes,  during  the  fire  and  storming  of  Chepultepec, 
and  the  outer  batteries,  is  abundantly  proved,  and  also  that 
Major  Twiggs,  who  was  killed  at  the  head  of  his  command,  and 
the  accused  were  the  only  marine  officers  whose  blood  flowed  in 
the  Valley  of  Mexico.  If,  then,  those  public  events,  collected  and 
published  as  Mr.  Lomas  testifies,  from  "  narrations  of  the  accus- 


60 

ed  and  other  gentlemen"  are  proved  true,  where  is  the  wrong  in 
giving  the  truth  for  good  and  proper  ends. 

The  accused  insists  that  there  is  no  rule  or  regulation  of  the 
Navy  Department,  prohibiting  any  person  from  copying  or  pub 
lishing  his  or  any  version  of  a  public  transaction  after  such  a 
lapse  of  time.  The  only  prohibitory  order  concerning  publications 
of  the  Mexican  campaign,  that  the  accused  is  aware  of,  was  that 
of  Governor  Marcy,  while  Secretary  of  War,  dated  January  28, 
1847,  which  is  appended  to  this  record,  and  only  prohibits  public 
ations  for  one  month  after  the  campaign  to  which  such  publica 
tion  relates.  The  accused  therefore  insists  that,  if  he  were  so 
minded,  he  has  a  clear  right  to  speak,  write,  or  publish,  on  pub 
lic  events  or  transactions  that  he  witnessed  in  the  Mexican  war, 
while  unrestrained  by  any  law  or  regulation  on  the  subject. 

Charge  3d.  Guilty  of  conduct  unbecoming  an  officer  and  a 
gentleman. 

The  specification  under  this  charge  is  not  made  out.  McGann 
swears  that  all  the  accused  said  upon  this  subject  was,  that  the 
accused  asked  him  "  if  I  knew  any  person,  or  if  I  would  attend  to 
it,"  take  this  testimony  in  connection  with  the  letter  No.  19,  and 
it  negatives  the  idea  that  the  accused  requested  him  to  publish 
the  article.  The  letter  expressly  says  "you  might  in  fact  do  with 
it  as  you  pleased  ;"  this  by  no  torture  of  our  language  can  be 
construed  into  a  request.  The  specification  must  be  proved  as 
charged,  and  proved  in  such  manner  as  to  leave  no  reasonable 
doubt  in  the  judgment  of  the  Court  as  to  what  the  writer  of  the 
article  intended. 

It  cannot  be  said  that  the  article  falsely  lauds  and  magnifies 
the  conduct  of  the  accused.  The  testimony  of  Brevet  Major 
Terrett,  and  Lieutenant  Rich,  fully  proves  the  conduct  of  the  ac 
cused  upon  the  occasion  referred  to,  was  that  of  a  fearless  officer 
seeking  to  distinguish  himself,  and  sustain  the  honor  and  bravery 
of  the  corps  to  which  he  belonged.  And  the  accused  submits,  that 
it  is  rarely  any  newspaper  articles,  laudatory  of  the  acts  of  an 
officer,  are  published  without  being  colored  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  give  them  the  effect  intended  by  the  writer.  The  article  in 
the  present  instance  was  witten,  as  Mr.  Lomas  testifies,  for  the 
purpose  of  "placing  Lieutenant  Devlin  properly  before  the 
country." 

If  Mr.  Lomas,  the  writer,  saw  fit  to  give  it  a  coloring,  the  ac 
cused  ought  not  to  be  held  responsible  for  that  act. 

Charge  4th.  Guilty  of  scandalous  conduct  tending  to  the  de 
struction  of  good  morals. 

The  specification  under  this  charge  in  not  made  out  in  any  re 
spect,  for  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  accused  had  anything  to 
do  with  the  statements  contained  in  the  article  published,  except 
as  stated  in  the  testimony  of  John  Lomas,  and  the  testimony 
certainly  shows  an  entire  absence  of  all  malice,  which  is  the  gist 
of  this  specification  ;  and  if  the  Court  find  the  accused  not  to  be 
the  original  author  of  the  communication,  be  it  true  or  false,  the 


61 

accused  is  not  liable  for  it  except  so  far  as  he  may  be  amenable 
for  copying  it. 

The  accused  proposes  to  resume  this  subject  in  connection-  with 
a  review  of  the  testimony  in  his  behalf.  And  first  the  learned 
Judge  Advocate  has  termed  the  evidence  of  Mr.  John  Lomas  as 
"most  extraordinary  testimony."  Mr.  Lomas  stands  before  this 
Court  uncontradicted  in  regard  to  any  material  fact.  And  he 
swears  positively  that  he  is  the  author ;  "  I  wrote  it,"  says  he  "of 
my  own  volition,  and  handed  it  to  the  accused,"  and  there  is  no 
evidence  that  the  accused  read  it  or  knew  who  was  the  author  of 
it,  nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  the  accused  knew  it  was  in 
Lomas'  handwriting.  Lomas  himself  says  it  is  not  like  his  ordi 
nary  handwriting.  Secondly,  what  motive  could  Lomas  have  in 
this  case  to  state  a  direct  falsehood,  it  is  not  pretended  that  he 
had  any  inimical  feelings  towards  any  member  of  the  marine 
corps. 

The  Judge  Advocate  had  notice  nearly  a  week  previous  to  the 
examination,  that  Lomas  would  be  examined  as  a  witness,  and 
the  facts  he  was  expected  to  testify  to,  and  had  it  in  his  power 
to  have  impeached  Lomas ;  as  he  did  not  do  so  the  positive  tes 
timony  of  Mr.  Lomas  must  be  taken  as  true  in  opposition  to  in 
ferences.  The  Court  are  bound  to  decide  the  case  upon  the  tes 
timony  before  them,  and  they  are  not  at  liberty  to  travel  out  of 
the  record.  To  convict  the  accused,  the  Court  must  decide  that 
Lomas  has  been  guilty  of  wilful  and  corrupt  perjury,  by  acquit 
ting  the  accused,  the  Court  rid  themselves  of  that  alternative. 

The  rule  of  evidence  is,  a  positive  fact  sworn  to  shall  control 
circumstances.  There  is  another  well  established  rule  in  crimi 
nal  cases,  the  prisoner  must  be  proved  to  be  guilty  beyond  all 
reasonable  doubt,  and  those  doubts  may  arise  either  upon  the 
proof  or  the  effect  of  it. 

What  then  is  the  true  state  of  this  case,  stripped  of  all  its  tech 
nicalities.  Mr.  John  Lomas,  a  friend  of  Lieutenant  Devlin,  had 
long  previous  to  the  publication  of  paper  No.  18,  had  conversa 
tions  with  the  accused  and  other  gentlemen  of  the  corps,  on  the 
subject  of  the  Mexican  campaign,  in  which  all  took  an  interest, 
and  of  his  own  volition  writes  a  newspaper  squib,  for  the  pur 
pose,  and  that  alone,  (as  sworn  to,)  of  doing  justice  to  his  friend ; 
he  hands  it  to  him  in  the  street  in  New  York,  accused  copies  it, 
hands  it  to  Sergeant  JVlcGanu  without  any  special  directions; 
McGann  copies  it  and  causes  it  to  be  published ;  this  excites  the 
nice  feelings  of  Brevet  Major  Reynolds,  he  visits  Washington  as 
the  champion  of  the  whole  marine  corps,  to  protect  its  integrity, 
and  the  honor  and  valor  of  the  officers  connected  with  it,  by  pre 
ferring  charges  of  a  grave  nature  against  the  accused,  which 
would  never  have  been  brought  had  he  not  had  personal  and 
private  malice  to  gratify. 

The  accused  insists  that  the  only  article  of  the  Navy  Regula 
tions  which  can  be  made  applicable  to  the  charges  and  specifica 
tions  against  him  is  article  third,  which  provides  that  any  officer 


62 

guilty  of  oppression,  cruelty,  fraud,  profane  swearing,  drunken 
ness,  or  any  other  scandalous  conduct,  tending  to  the  destruction 
of  good  morals,  shall  be  cashiered,  or  suffer  such  other  punish 
ment  as  a  Court-Martial  shall  adjudge.  The  accused  respectfully 
insists  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  evidence  before  the  Court  that 
brings  his  case  within  the  said  article,  and  that  the  Court  are 
bound,  in  passing  upon  the  evidence,  to  take  all  the  facts  and  cir 
cumstances  into  consideration,  and  especially  the  following.  He, 
the  accused,  was  for  years  in  the  city  of  Brooklyn  after  the  alleged 
threat  in  Mexico,  of  "publishing  Major  Reynold's  conduct  to  the 
world,  or  to  his  constituents,"  and  no  unfavorable  inference  should 
be  drawn  against  him  on  account  of  such  previous  threat,  for  that 
threat  he  has  been  heretofore  tried  in  Mexico,  and  that,  too,  upon 
the  testimony  of  Major  Reynolds  ;  that  there  is  no  evidence  before 
the  Court  that  since  his  return  from  Mexico  he  has  ever  repeated 
any  such  threats,  or  has  manifested  any  ill-feelings  towards  Major 
Reynolds.  He  appeals  to  the  extracts  from  the  several  official 
reports  and  papers  which  have  been  introduced  by  him  for  the 
purpose  of  showing  that  he  faithfully  performed  his  duty  on  the 
occasion  referred  to,  and  that  he  bears  scars  upon  his  front  as 
evidence  that  he  did  not  turn  his  back  upon  the  enemy. 

In  conclusion,  he  solemnly  protests  that  whatever  part  or  agency 
the  Court  may  attribute  to  him  in  relation  to  the  said  publication 
of  the  communication  signed  "An  Observer,"  he  did  not  design 
the  slightest  disrespect  to  any  officer  connected  with  the  public 
service.  He  may  have  been  indiscreet,  nay  more,  he  may  have 
err  3d  in  copying  the  paper,  No.  18,  and  handing  it  to  Sergeant 
McGann,  but  it  was  an  error  of  the  head  and  not  of  the  heart. 
In  hastily  reading  over  the  paper  as  he  copied  it,  it  never  occur 
red  to  him  that  it  might  possibly  be  construed  in  the  manner 
sought  to  have  it  construed  by  the  charges  and  specifications 
brought  forward  in  this  matter. 

With  these  brief  remarks  the  accused  submits  this  case  to  the 
Court,  relying  confidently  and  respectfully  on  their  judgment  to 
discriminate  between  actions  and  motives. 

JOHN  S.  DEVLIN. 


